This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
WS-Eventing proposes that the event source define some output-only operations for the events it will send, as shown in the following example from the spec: <wsdl:portType name="Warnings" wse:EventSource="true" > <wsdl:operation name="WindOp" > <wsdl:output message="tns:WindMsg" /> </wsdl:operation> </wsdl:portType> WS-I Basic Profile R2303 says the following: 4.5.2 Allowed Operations Solicit-Response and Notification operations are not well defined by WSDL 1.1; furthermore, WSDL 1.1 does not define bindings for them. R2303 A DESCRIPTION MUST NOT use Solicit-Response and Notification type operations in a wsdl:portType definition. Proposal: Replace this with some WS-Policy that will allow an event source to advertise which events will can generate.
2009-01-15: discussed and Gil has action to take up the output only issue at WS-I once more with feeling.
2009-02-17 No member seems to be taking this up with WS-I
members seem to agree that a practical solution is to shift to imput operations. Action-48 on Gil, Wu, Dug
proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Mar/0127.html
Action-61
*** Bug 6661 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
2009-06-11 Issue 6661 is merged with this issue. Text from 6661 is as follows: Appendix I of the WS-Eventing Member Submission, "Service Metadata for Eventing", is incomplete in a number of areas. Firstly it does not indicate how an Event Sink is expected to derive the binding details for the Notifications. Will the Notifications be sent as RPC/Encoded, Doc/Literal? Will the Notifications be sent using SOAP 1.1 or SOAP 1.2? Secondly, the relationship between the "endpoint reference for the event source" and the annotated portType is unclear. One might think that the "endpoint reference for the event source" is equivalent to the wsdl:port that implements a binding of the annotated portType, but this conjecture is not supported by any text or example. "Service Metadata for Eventing" is also technically incorrect in that it requires Event Sources to process a WSDL containing output-only operations in order to generate the code necessary to correctly process and dispatch Notification messages which is a violation of BP 1.1 R2303. While one could argue about the relevance of WS-I profiles to infrastructure-level protocols, it is clear that creation of Notification handlers is, in this context, an application-level activity as the type and structure of Notifications is driven by the application and not WS-Eventing.
Proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Jul/0046.html
proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0057/wseventing_6401-6.html
Amended proposal at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0061/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug2.doc
proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Aug/att-0061/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug2.doc
proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Sep/att-0004/ws-eventing-6401-6-dug5.doc
2009-09-01 resolved with comment 12