RE: Clarifying assertion for HTTP Location

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Clarifying assertion for HTTP Location

Jonathan Marsh-2

Thank you for this comment.  The Working Group this issue as a CR131 [1].

 

The Working Group closed this issue with no action – neither the HTTP binding nor the SOAP binding support any MEPs beyond in-out, in-only, and robust-in-only.

 

Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of January, we will assume you agree with the resolution of these issues.

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR131   

 


From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Kaputin (gmail)
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 3:56 AM
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Clarifying assertion for HTTP Location

 

Part 2 section 6.7.1.1 Construction of the request IRI using the {http location} property.

This section contains the assertion:

"Strings enclosed within single curly braces MUST be element names from the instance data of the input message."

I assume 'input message' here refers generically to any input data for the HTTP request (i.e. to a WSDL input, output or fault message element).   To make this clearer and to keep it consistent with the description at hyperlink "instance data", perhaps you could restate this something like:

"Strings enclosed within single curly braces MUST be element names from the instance data of the input, output or fault message."

regards,
John Kaputin.