W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > January 2006

RE: Request optional Response HTTP Binding

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:30:21 -0800
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C6D2803@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: "WS-Addressing" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

The reason I didn't call it an "extension" was it would be unclear which
is the extension.  If I say "request optional response http binding
extension", it could be perceived as an extension to the request
optional response http binding.  The most accurate name I could think
of, which is way too long, is "request optional response http binding
extension to soap 1.1 http binding".

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mbaker@gmail.com [mailto:mbaker@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Baker
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 11:45 AM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: WS-Addressing
> Subject: Re: Request optional Response HTTP Binding
> 
> Looks good, Dave.  Volcanoes averted!
> 
> Actually, there's one comment that I should have made earlier.  This
> document doesn't prescribe a complete binding, just an extension to
> other bindings (as you note by the use of the word "refinement" in the
> abstract).  I'd suggest changing the title to "binding extension", or
> something similar.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark.
> 
> On 1/23/06, David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a request optional response binding for status code 202:
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.       http://www.markbaker.ca
> Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 20:31:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:11 GMT