> * addition of new operations within a WSDL portType or binding (along with
> the corresponding schema, message and part definitions)
The others examples seem okay to me, as they're effectively
"subclassing" the current implementation -- the revisions wouldn't
invalidate extant implementations. But I'm much less comfortable with
this item. For example, a new operation could be defined that
significantly changes the semantics, such as the ability to "withdraw"
unacked messages.
I think one of the following changes must be made (in my decreasing
order of preference):
Add weasel-wording like "new operations that don't affect the
semantics of operations already defined."
Remove this item
Define a distinguished "notImplemented" SOAP fault code.
Add a "what operations do you support" operation.
--
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
