RE: [wsrm] detailed proposal to remove Message Header from Poll message and to merge MessageHeader and Request elements

Title: RE: [wsrm] detailed proposal to remove Message Header from Poll message and to merge MessageHeader and Request elements

It seems that the original reason for keeping in a separate/external header (MessageHeader) elements  that could possibly be "reused" from other SOAP extensions(like message ID) does no longer hold, as all elements inside MessageHeader need be under control of the RMP and have very specific meaning for RM.

In that case I have no problem merging MessageHeader  with RM Request.

Also OK with the rest of the proposal, except for one more renaming I suggest:

Collapsing MessageHeader into RM:Request emphasizes the term "Request":

I find the name RM:Request a bit confusing. 

A request usually expects a "response". But RM requirements don't always

ask for responses such as an Ack.

Plus, "Request" and "Response" are quite overloaded terms, and when used with an RM meaning, they seem to imply a "binding" with a similar MEP (WSDL), where in fact they should remain orthogonal. An RM:Request could apply to a WSDL "response" as well.

I propose to rename RM:Request into RM:Requirement.

Jacques

-----Original Message-----

From: Tom Rutt [mailto:]

Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 1:43 PM

To: wsrm

Subject: [wsrm] detailed proposal to remove Message Header from Poll

message and to merge MessageHeader and Request elements

Proposal to resolve New issue on need for MessageHeader in Poll Request:

If a poll request is not piggybacked on a reliable message request., it 

does not need a message header. There is no meaning to expiry time for 

the poll request, and there is no need for a message id for the poll 

request itself.

It would simplify the protocol if the poll request message, which is not 

itself piggybacked on a new reliable message request, does not include 

the request header.

In addition, this change would allow the Request header to be merged 

with the MessageHeader, so further simplify the protocol processing.

<JD>I was fine with removing the Message Header from Poll / Ack / Fault,

but merging MessageHeader with Request is going far beyond that...

In any case, it seems that we need to keep a "request-response - neutral" element

to hold values that are common to all reliable messages (expirytime, ID, seqnum)

Also I thought we had decided to 

Detailed Changes Required:

Lines 873 and 874 have the following Sentence:

“

A RMP MUST include a MessageHeader element in a Reliable Message, a 

PollRequest

message, an Acknowledgment message, or a Fault message.

“

Change this to the following:

“

A sending RMP must include a MessageHeader element in a Reliable message.

“

lines 900 and 901 state the following:

“

The RMP MUST include the MessageId element for Reliable Message, 

Acknowledgment

message, Fault message and PollRequest message.

“

This needs to be changed to the following:

“

The sending RMP must include the MessageID element for a reliable message.

“

Merge the existing section 3.2 into Section 3.1. add the three child 

elements “ack requested”, “DupicateElimination”: and “MessageOrder” at 

the end of the MessageHeader.

Rename the new merged section 3.1 to be “Request Element”

Change all occurences of “Message Header” to “Request Element in the 

entire document.

<JD> Isn't that too much? Isn't that just intended to mean the ReplyPattern element 

will now be included in Request Element (for requests) and Response element (for responses)?

</JD>

Remove the “InvalidMessageHeader” fault from the tables in section 3.1 

before line 954

Merge the explanatory text after line 1266 in table 18 from the 

InvalidMessageHeader fault into the InvalidRequest fault: as follows:

“

InvalidRequest -

This fault is sent when the Request element is wrong or invalid. 

Examples are:

1.When any of the mandatory elements such as MessageId, ExpiryTime, 

ReplyPattern are missing

2.SOAP:mustUnderstand attribute is missing

3.When AckRequested, DuplicateElimination or MessageOrder elements 

appear twice

4.SOAP:mustUnderstand attribute is missing

“

.Change the message format pictures in Section 3 to take MessageHeader 

out of the poll response message.

Change the message format pictures in Section 3 to merge MessageHeader 

and Request element into a new Request element.

Lines 1099 thru 1101 , in the existing section 3.3 state the following:

“

A sender MUST include the PollRequest element only in the PollRequest 

message as shown in

the Figure6. The PollRequest message contains two direct child elements 

for SOAP Header

element. The one is MessageHeader element, and the other is the 

PollRequest element.

“

change this to the following:

“

A sender MUST include the PollRequest element only in the PollRequest 

message as shown in

the Figure6. The PollRequest message contains the PollRequest element.

“

-- 

----------------------------------------------------

Tom Rutt                email: ; 

Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.