Per my action item, here is the suggested resolution for
issue CR 029:
The issue notes that in section 5.7.2, where the association
of SOAP MEPs and WSDL MEPs is first mentioned in the context
of the SOAP 1.2 binding, the constraints placed on the
binding of SOAP MEPs to WSDL MEPs is not mentioned.
A suggestion was made to effectively move the information
from section 5.10.3, SOAP 1.2 Binding Rules. I recommend
that this *not* be done.
Rather, I recommend that we set an anchor for 5.10.3 bullet
point 2 (SOAP MEP Selection) [1] and add a link ("see
5.10.3 SOAP 1.2 Binding Rules, SOAP MEP Selection, for
constraints on binding") to the end of the problematic
paragraph in 5.7.2.
Rationale: no matter where we put the information, we
mention it somewhere else, unless we are willing to
seriously restructure the SOAP Binding. I strongly
disrecommend doing so. An alternative would be to duplicate
the information. Again, I actively oppose this resolution,
as it raises too great a possibility of falling out of synch
and into internal contradiction. Consequently, the
least-costly and most effective solution appears to be
creating a link, which should indicate that the linked-to
section contains constraints on the binding.
[1] Actually, I would recommend establishing anchors for
each of these bullet points, so that they can be linked to;
I believe that a similar issue exists with regard to HTTP
Methods, for instance. It may be better, in that case, to
change the list into headings, instead.
Amy!
--
Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis tibco.com
|