Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?

Expand Messages
  • Aleksander Slominski
    hi, i wonder what is the (current) best practice to describe in WSDL 1.1 that a service endpoint supports WS-Addressing (and in particular that it may send
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 8, 2005
      hi,

      i wonder what is the (current) best practice to describe in WSDL 1.1
      that a service endpoint supports WS-Addressing (and in particular that
      it may send response as one-way message to ReplyTo/FaultTo address)?

      i checked "Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding"
      http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/#wsdl11requestresponse
      but i still have not idea how to do it ...

      consider echo operation that takes echoString and echoStringResponse

      <portType name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
      <operation name="echoString">
      <input message="tns:echoString" name="echoString"/>
      <output message="tns:echoStringResponse"
      name="echoStringResponse"/>
      </operation>
      </portType>

      how can i annotate it to indicate that output message may be
      asynchronous - or should i do this in binding as it is a transport detail?

      <binding name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortBinding"
      type="tns:WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
      <soap:binding style="document"
      transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
      <operation name="echoString">
      <soap:operation soapAction="http://soapinterop.org/"
      style="document"/>
      <input name="echoString">
      <soap:body
      namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
      use="literal"/>
      </input>
      <output name="echoStringResponse">
      <soap:body
      namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
      use="literal"/>
      </output>
      </operation>
      </binding>

      i think that for now i can use a little heuristics: if i see
      portType/operation@wsa:Action then i successfully detected that it is
      safe to send WS-Addressing message one way with ReplyTo/FaultTo headers
      - however is it the best i can do? what about services that are
      WSA-enabled but use Default Action Pattern?

      what about some general extension (feature) for WSDL 1.1 to indicate
      that one-way messaging transport is required (possible)? or that
      WS-Addressing is supported?

      let me now if i missed something.

      thanks,

      alek

      --
      The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay
    • paul.downey@bt.com
      Alex, for current best practice , you could take a look at the test cases submitted by Microsoft to the WS-Addr working group:
      Message 2 of 3 , Jun 8, 2005
        Alex,

        for 'current best practice', you could take a look at the test cases submitted by
        Microsoft to the WS-Addr working group:
        http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Mar/att-0209/WS_Addressing_Scenarios.htm

        However, the W3C are in the process of standardising WS-Addressing and
        will be publishing a 'binding' for describing addressing in WSDL 1.1 and 2.0.
        latest editors' and working drafts are available from the WG pages:
        http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/

        HTH
        Paul


        -----Original Message-----
        From: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Aleksander Slominski
        Sent: Wed 6/8/2005 6:24 PM
        To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com; public-ws-addressing@...
        Cc: www-ws-desc@...
        Subject: [soapbuilders] current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?

        hi,

        i wonder what is the (current) best practice to describe in WSDL 1.1
        that a service endpoint supports WS-Addressing (and in particular that
        it may send response as one-way message to ReplyTo/FaultTo address)?

        i checked "Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding"
        http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/#wsdl11requestresponse
        but i still have not idea how to do it ...

        consider echo operation that takes echoString and echoStringResponse

        <portType name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
        <operation name="echoString">
        <input message="tns:echoString" name="echoString"/>
        <output message="tns:echoStringResponse"
        name="echoStringResponse"/>
        </operation>
        </portType>

        how can i annotate it to indicate that output message may be
        asynchronous - or should i do this in binding as it is a transport detail?

        <binding name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortBinding"
        type="tns:WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
        <soap:binding style="document"
        transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
        <operation name="echoString">
        <soap:operation soapAction="http://soapinterop.org/"
        style="document"/>
        <input name="echoString">
        <soap:body
        namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
        use="literal"/>
        </input>
        <output name="echoStringResponse">
        <soap:body
        namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
        use="literal"/>
        </output>
        </operation>
        </binding>

        i think that for now i can use a little heuristics: if i see
        portType/operation@wsa:Action then i successfully detected that it is
        safe to send WS-Addressing message one way with ReplyTo/FaultTo headers
        - however is it the best i can do? what about services that are
        WSA-enabled but use Default Action Pattern?

        what about some general extension (feature) for WSDL 1.1 to indicate
        that one-way messaging transport is required (possible)? or that
        WS-Addressing is supported?

        let me now if i missed something.

        thanks,

        alek

        --
        The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay



        -----------------------------------------------------------------
        This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.



        _____

        Yahoo! Groups Links


        * To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soapbuilders/


        * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


        * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
      • Aleksander Slominski
        ... Alek ;-) ... thanks for link! however looking on WSDL used in this interop (at the end of the document) how one can determine that service supports
        Message 3 of 3 , Jun 8, 2005
          paul.downey@... wrote:
          Alex, 
            
          Alek ;-)
          for 'current best practice', you could take a look at the test cases submitted by 
          Microsoft to the WS-Addr working group:
          http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Mar/att-0209/WS_Addressing_Scenarios.htm
            
          thanks for link! however looking on WSDL used in this interop (at the end of the document) how one can determine that service supports WS-Addressing? WSA is not mentioned in the WSDL ...
          However, the W3C are in the process of standardising WS-Addressing and 
          will be publishing a 'binding' for describing addressing in WSDL 1.1 and 2.0.
          latest editors' and working drafts are available from the WG pages:
          http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/
            
          unfortunately Working Draft: 2002-04-13 (looks like typo it should be probably 2005 in http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/): Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding is not publicly available (password protected) - is there somewhere publicly accessible version? is it different form what i had (http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/)? is there something new in the latest editors' version?

          thanks,

          alek
          
          -----Original Message-----
          From:	soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Aleksander Slominski
          Sent:	Wed 6/8/2005 6:24 PM
          To:	soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com; public-ws-addressing@...
          Cc:	www-ws-desc@...
          Subject:	[soapbuilders] current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?
          
          hi,
          
          i wonder what is the (current) best practice to describe in WSDL 1.1 
          that a service endpoint supports WS-Addressing (and in particular that 
          it may send response as one-way message to ReplyTo/FaultTo address)?
          
          i checked "Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding"
          http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/#wsdl11requestresponse
          but i still have not idea how to do it ...
          
          consider echo operation that takes echoString and echoStringResponse
          
              <portType name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
                  <operation name="echoString">
                      <input message="tns:echoString" name="echoString"/>
                      <output message="tns:echoStringResponse" 
          name="echoStringResponse"/>
                  </operation>
              </portType>
          
          how can i annotate it to indicate that output message may be 
          asynchronous - or should i do this in binding as it is a transport detail?
          
              <binding name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortBinding"
                  type="tns:WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
                  <soap:binding style="document" 
          transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
                  <operation name="echoString">
                      <soap:operation soapAction="http://soapinterop.org/" 
          style="document"/>
                      <input name="echoString">
                          <soap:body 
          namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
                              use="literal"/>
                      </input>
                      <output name="echoStringResponse">
                          <soap:body 
          namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
                              use="literal"/>
                      </output>
                  </operation>
              </binding>
          
          i think that for now i can use a little heuristics:  if i see 
          portType/operation@wsa:Action then i successfully detected that it is 
          safe to send WS-Addressing message one way with ReplyTo/FaultTo headers 
          - however is it the best i can do? what about services that are 
          WSA-enabled but use Default Action Pattern?
          
          what about some general extension (feature) for WSDL 1.1 to indicate 
          that one-way messaging transport is required (possible)? or that 
          WS-Addressing is supported?
          
          let me now if i missed something.
          
          thanks,
          
          alek
          
            


          -- 
          The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay
          
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.