This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
11) In the case where MTOM assertion is included in the WSDL endpoint with wsp:Optional='true' and the client of a req-res operation does not use application/xop+xml media-type and wants to indicate that the service can send application/xop+xml media-type (bug 4341): how about saying something along the lines of -- This spec does not define how to convey which policy alternative is selected or which feature is supported. Specific protocols may have an ability to convey such information. For example, Accept HTTP header may be used by the HTTP client to convey which media-types are acceptable for the response.
When an endpoint reflects a compact policy expression with the MTOM assertion marked with wsp:Optional='true', it may be difficult to know which alternative has been engaged. In such cases, if a request message is received that is an application/soap+xml message, then the receiving endpoint SHOULD respond (if at all) with an application/soap+xml response message unless there is some other indicator that specifies that the response is to be sent using MTOM encoding. To ensure that a response message is serialized as application/xop+xml a client can send an application/xop+xml request message. RESOLUTION: Issue 4506 is closed with the text above to the optional=true defintion See http://www.w3.org/2007/06/20-xmlprotocol-irc#T19-26-25
"For example, when using SOAP/HTTP binding, the 'Accept' HTTP header value of 'application/xop+xml' in the request message indicates that the response may be sent using MTOM encoding." RESOLUTION: add anish's proposed addendum to the resolution to See http://www.w3.org/2007/06/27-xmlprotocol-irc#T19-35-33
RESOLUTION: amend resolution to 4506 with proposal from Pete in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2007Jul/0002.html See http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xmlprotocol-irc#T19-24-35