8288 2009-11-13 21:57:32 +0000 Eventing: requirements on Notification Bindings for EventDescriptions too lax 2010-03-17 10:55:48 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WS-Resource Access Eventing FPWD All All CLOSED REMIND hasProposal P2 normal --- 1 gilbert.pilz gilbert.pilz dug public-ws-resource-access-notifications oldest_to_newest 29561 0 gilbert.pilz 2009-11-13 21:57:32 +0000 Section A.1.2 "Bindings for EventDescriptions" contains the following paragraph: "For any Notification Format it SHOULD be possible to determine how a given wse:eventType will appear on the wire as a notification in a subscription created with that format. The following sections define how wse:eventTypes bind to notifications for the two Notification Formats defined in this specification; Unwrapped and Wrapped. Specifications or profiles that define additional Notification Formats SHOULD define how wse:eventTypes bind to the notifications for those formats. In the absence of a mapping for a particular Notification Format, implementations MAY provide a Notification WSDL (see below) that explicitly describes the notification operations." This allows for the possibility of Notification Formats for which there is no well defined mapping from a wse:eventType to the on-the-wire notification. This completely undoes the entire purpose of EventDescriptions, which is to enable the event sink to determine how notifications will appear. Proposal: s/SHOULD/MUST/ in the above paragraph 29626 1 dug 2009-11-17 21:59:21 +0000 applies to both SHOULDs s/SHOULD/MUST/g 31246 2 bob 2010-01-26 19:29:01 +0000 resolved as proposed as amended by comment #1