RE: HTTP Method selection

"Jonathan Marsh" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.description
Message-ID <002201c71a4c$99d50660$3401a8c0@DELLICIOUS>
This is now issue CR123. A proposal is to add a sentence along the lines of 

"Conformance to this (HTTP) binding requires conformance to the wsdlx:safety
extension [ref]."

Or if you don't like "conformance",

"Implementations supporting this binding must also support for the
wsdlx:safety extension [ref]."

Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Youenn Fablet
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 2:40 AM
> To: www-ws-desc
> Subject: HTTP Method selection
> 
> 
> Reading section 6.3.1 of the latest draft, the presence of the safe
> property may change the selected HTTP method (GET or POST typically).
> If we have operation foo that is marked as safe:
>    - a processor supporting the HTTP binding and the safety extension
> will select the GET method for operation foo
>    - a processor supporting the HTTP binding but not the safety
> extension will select the POST method for operation foo
> This may prevent interoperability.
> To ensure interoperability, the engagement of the HTTP binding extension
> should in fact generally imply the engagement of the safety extension.
> The cost of the safety extension being low, I think it makes sense to
> tighten the link between the safety and HTTP extensions.
>    Youenn
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.