Yes -- and the same is true of a SOAP message.
Typically, SOAP interchanges are stateless. (And they should be.)
Therefore the order request will indicate what's being ordered.

Anne

On 2/21/07, Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 21.02.2007, at 12:38, Paul Fremantle wrote:

Good answer Steve.

I have a question for Jan. When you order the pizza over the phone how do
you prove you didn't buy a house?


Well, assumed I have a witness for what I said, the uttering of "this is a
pizza order, let me have a large magaritha" should sufficiently prove and
state my intent - it is self descriptive (which is a property of all
business documents, BTW).

Jan





Paul

On 2/21/07, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Assuming you are using SAML and WS-Security and have kept a log of the
> messages then its fine as this will contain both their authentication and
> your own.
>
> If however you didn't use security and its an open exchange then you are
> just going to have fun in the courts.  This is one of the key things about
> Trust (and one of the reasons that security != HTTPS), before you start a
> transaction you need to trust the other party to deliver or trust that you
> have recourse if something goes wrong.  This plays back to something I asked
> at a conference back in 2001 (IIRC) (just after my dad had seen a
> presentation on WS and said "so why is ASCII RPC now a good idea?").  The
> presenter had outlined the holy trinity of WS including UDDI and talked of a
> "business" scenario where you would discover automatically a credit card
> clearance company and select the cheapest one and then complete the
> transaction.  My point then was that this is bollocks as ! if that were true
> then I'd set up the world's cheapest credit card clearing company in
> somewhere with no extradition treaties and then fleece the world.
>
> Trust and validity are serious and difficult concepts, its fine for
> people to argue about document shifting approach X v Y, but if they don't
> provide a framework for Trust and validity on top of that base then its a
> pointless argument.
>
> SAML, WS-Security, WS-Trust and a decent set of audit logs.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> On 21/02/07, Jan Algermissen < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   Hi,
> >
> > if have SOA-ordered a pizza the other day but yesterday I learned I
> > sold my house.....
> >
> > How do I prove in court that my digitally signed pizza order was
> > indeed a pizza order and not (as the recipient claims) a house sale?
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
>


--
Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair

http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com


Reply via email to