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

Re: NEW ISSUE

From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:34:22 -0500
Message-Id: <8CB18AC4-2F48-11D9-B0D5-000A95BD86C0@bea.com>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
To: Mark Little <mark.little@arjuna.com>

I don't see enough information yet to justify a separate issue; both 
question the purpose and utility of the Action property. If you'd like 
to raise a new issue, please provide more information, and 
differentiate it from this one.

Thanks,

On Nov 5, 2004, at 11:12 AM, Mark Little wrote:

> I'd prefer to have this as a separate issue. If we decided to drop 
> wsa:Action (which I doubt), then i017 is superfluous. If we decided to 
> keep it in some form, then it's not.
>
> Mark.
>
> On 5 Nov 2004, at 13:31, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Can we consider this as part of i017, or is it really separate?
>>
>>> i017 Purpose of the Action property
>>> Why is it neccessary to be able to specify a non-default Action? Why 
>>> are non-unique Action headers allowed? What is the relationship 
>>> between the  action value and the operation name?
>>
>> (Also, please include a description of the issue along with "NEW 
>> ISSUE"; otherwise, we'll just have a monster "NEW ISSUE" thread. :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2004, at 3:41 AM, Mark Little wrote:
>>
>>> Not exactly sure of the wording you'd require, but here goes:
>>>
>>> I'd like to propose raising a new issue on the utility of wsa:Action 
>>> and its presence in a specification about addressing.
>>>
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> Mark Little,
>>> Chief Architect,
>>> Arjuna Technologies Ltd.
>>>
>>> www.arjuna.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
>> Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
>>
>>
>
>

--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:34:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT