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

Re: Mandator wsa:Action (was Re: WS-Addr issues)

From: Mark Little <mark.little@arjuna.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:54:10 +0000
Message-Id: <CE7D914B-2FD9-11D9-8D9C-00039399DACE@arjuna.com>
Cc: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, "<public-ws-addressing@w3.org>" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>

>> My feeling is that given that the charter doesn't say 'Start by taking
>> equal parts WS-A and WS-MD' that we *are* working on WS-A and that 
>> given
>> our schedule, fixing things that are broken rather than throwing open
>> the entire design space is the right way forward.
>
> I haven't suggested throwing open the entire spec. And this does come 
> back to definitions of broken. Let's just consider this one issue 
> (mandatory wsa:Action) and not make it a rallying point for a 
> discussion about whether or not this spec needs to be defined from 
> ground up again (I don't want that and I don't think it should be 
> anyway). I think a reasonable compromise in this specific case is to 
> make wsa:Action optional. Anyway, it's hopefully going to be an issue 
> we can vote on and then move on from there.
>

By the way, just to be clear: if we do vote and wsa:Action remains 
mandatory then I'm happy with that. As far as I'm concerned the issue 
would be closed and we should move on to other things. I'm assuming 
that the inverse situation would similarly hold, i.e., if it becomes 
optional the proponents of mandatory will consider it closed in the 
spirit of openness and togetherness. (Sorry if that starts to sound a 
bit like a 60's "love-in", but it's Saturday morning here and I'm 
suffering a little from the night before!)

Mark.
Received on Saturday, 6 November 2004 09:56:15 GMT

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