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

Re: Who knows what from where?

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:39:57 -0400
To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Cc: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-id: <453E25BD.4090706@tibco.com>

It wasn't rhetorical.  The point is not that the information can't be
provided, but that there is one more piece to provide, and thus one more
piece to get wrong.  In this case, the RM spec has to explain what
"backchannel" means to it.

I'm particularly leery because "everyone knows" what backchannel means. 
The odds of everyone actually "knowing" the same thing decrease
exponentially with the number of people involved.

I'm trying to probe here exactly what this extra moving part is buying
us.  AFAICT we can describe the exact same behavior along with similar
behavior in other situations purely syntactically, without resorting to
a concept of "backchannel".

All problems in computing are solved by an extra level of indirection --
except the problem of too many levels of indirection.

Marc Hadley wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2006, at 5:35 PM, David Hull wrote:
>> Pursuant to CR33:
>> If I'm a client and I know about WS-RM, and the server says "I support
>> WS-RM and you can use 'http://.../RMAnon.*' in a response endpoint",
>> then I know immediately that I can use this facility.  If the server
>> says "I support WS-RM and I can send responses on the backchannel", then
>> I need to know, from somewhere, that "backchannel" in this case is
>> referring to the special WS-RM URI family.
>> Where would this information appear?
> At the risk of responding to a rhetorical question, the RM spec would
> appear to be the logical place.
> Marc.
> ---
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2006 14:40:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:14 UTC