W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > November 2004

RE: WS-Addr issues

From: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:36:53 -0500
To: "Jim Webber" <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>
Cc: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Jim Webber" <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>, "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, "Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org, "Savas Parastatidis" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <OFEB4C11F4.477DBA60-ON85256F43.000D520D-85256F43.000E5D2F@us.ibm.com>

Note that the use of reference properties within an epr is already
optional: epr issuers are not required to use them. The only requirement is
for consumers of the epr to echo them back as SOAP headers.


                      "Jim Webber"                                                                                                             
                      <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac        To:       "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Jim Webber" <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>, 
                      .uk>                             Francisco Curbera/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>                 
                      Sent by:                        cc:       "Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>,         
                      public-ws-addressing-req         <public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org>, "Savas Parastatidis"                             
                      uest@w3.org                      <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>                                                    
                                                      Subject:  RE: WS-Addr issues                                                             
                      11/04/2004 06:02 PM                                                                                                      

> - Jim wanting to get rid of ref props/params and Action (and
> by extension I'm wondering if messageid and relatesTo should
> be removed IHO),

Nope. I'd be happy with the removal of refprop/param and optional
action. Nothing else has impacted negatively in my work.

However I understand the need for expediency. If refprop/param remain
then as long as their use is optional I won't hang myself on them. Ditto
for action - I'll just use a generic "urn:process:message" action.

Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 02:37:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:07 UTC