W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > February 2009

Re: W3C SOAP Over JMS Binding Specification review comments

From: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:57:58 +0000
To: dongbo.xiao@oracle.com
Cc: "Michael Chen" <MICHAEL.X.CHEN@oracle.com>, public-soap-jms@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFE81E3C45.2E89EF78-ON80257553.0041230A-80257553.0041BC2D@uk.ibm.com>
 Greetings Dongbo, thanks for your comments[1]. We have assigned an 
identifier to both of your comments and we will respond to each comment 
separately so that we can keep an accurate track of the status. You can 
see all the comments in our wiki [2].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2009Jan/0015.html 
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/wiki/2009-01_LC_Comments

Regards, Roland




From:
"Dongbo Xiao" <dongbo.xiao@oracle.com>
To:
"public-soap-jms@w3.org" <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
Cc:
"dongbo.xiao@oracle.com" <dongbo.xiao@oracle.com>, "Michael Chen" 
<MICHAEL.X.CHEN@oracle.com>
Date:
15/01/2009 14:07
Subject:
W3C SOAP Over JMS Binding Specification review comments



Dear SOAP Over JMS WG, 
 
I am glad to see that the group has made great progress with the spec 
since I left. 
Below please find the comments that I have, as an individual contributor, 
to the current version of the SOAP/JMS binding spec.
 
-- Comments --
1. General Comments
The JMS URI Scheme spec defines there variants: ?jndi?, ?queue?, and ?
topic?. It is not clear whether all three variants have to be supported by 
a conforming implementation of the binding spec. If ?queue and ?topic? 
variant have to be supported as well, it would make sense to discuss the 
meaning of the relevant properties (for example, destinationName and 
replyToName) in the cases where the jms-variant is ?queue? or ?topic?. 
 
2. Chapter 2.2
It seems to me that there may be a discrepancy between what is specified 
here and what is described in 3.4.5 (also 3.6.1.1) regarding the 
precedence between WSDL elements or attributes and WSDL endpoint URI. A 
couple of small examples or use cases would help to clearly demonstrate 
the precedence rules. 
 
Regards,
Dongbo
 







Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2009 11:59:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:20 GMT