Do we really need to point to a specific
version of WS-Addr? I thought that one
of the composibility aspects of these
WS specs was that we wouldn't need to change
all of them just because one of them
was modified. As long as the basic ideas of
WSA (that RM needs) don't change - like
EPRs, MI Headers... can't we just talk about
them in generic terms and let the implementations
decide which version they want to
support? Should one that (for
some reason) can't step up to the latest WSA be tagged
as non-RM compliant? I don't think
it should. It may not be as interoperable, but that's
a different story.
I've seen other specs go thru quite
a lot of pain because different specs they're
composing with point to different levels
of WSA - and they actually try to support
more than one at the same time - what
a hassle.
-Doug
Anish Karmarkar <>
09/20/2005 04:01 PM
To
wsrx <>
cc
Subject
[ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Which
version of WS-Addressing spec?
Title: Which version of WS-Addressing spec?
Description:
Page 25, lines 664-665 at [1] says:
"WS-ReliableMessaging faults MUST include as the [action] property
the
default fault action URI defined in the version of WS-Addressing used in
the message."
This can be interpreted as any version of WS-Addressing is allowed with
WSRM. WSRM spec should specify which version of WS-Addressing is used by
the spec.
A related issue is that:
On page 25, lines 664-666 talk about the default
"http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/08/addressing/fault" as the
Fault
[action] property. This default is defined only for the SOAP binding and
is meant to be used with WS-Addr faults not WSRM faults.
Justification:
Without clearly indicating which version of WS-Addressing is
required/used by the spec, independent implementation will not
interoperate. WS-Addressing specification has changed substantially (in
certain sections/artifacts of the WS-Addressing spec) over the years.
Target: core
Type: design
Proposal:
Use the CR version of the spec [2] (in this paragraph as well as the
normative reference for the spec) for now and make changes as the
addressing spec transitions through the process of becoming a REC. Based
on the WS-Addr schedule and WSRM schedule, WS-Addr is slated to become
a
REC before WSRM is final.
For the related issue:
change line 664 from --
"WS-ReliableMessaging faults MUST include as the [action] property
the
default fault"
to --
"WS-ReliableMessaging faults MUST include as the [action] property
as
defined by WS-Addressing [ref]."
and
delete lines 665-667
Related issues: none
[1]
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14548/wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-03.pdf
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-ws-addr-core-20050817/
