<decloak> Dave, I have *significant* heartburn with this as it precludes the use case of sending a WS-RM SequenceAcknowledgement (or other infrastructure-level signal) as a SOAP envelope in the HTTP response. The use case is considered to be of critical importance to a number of customers with which I have dealt who want to leverage WS-RM for both oneway and asynch request response message flows between business partners. This proposed binding simply carries forward the mistake that the WS-I BP 1.x made with R2714 and R2750 (which I argued against at the time). I've got another post still in draft responding to another thread on this matter that I will be sending shortly. </decloak> Cheers, Christopher Ferris STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440 phone: +1 508 377 9295 public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 01/20/2006 01:09:47 PM: > Here's an xml spec xml and html version of a one-way HTTP Binding. > > Cheers, > Dave[attachment "soap11onewayhttpbinding.xml" deleted by Christopher > B Ferris/Waltham/IBM] [attachment "soap11onewayhttpbinding.html" > deleted by Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM]Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:34:17 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:11 GMT