W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > April 2007

New Proposed Alternative H to resolve WS Policy LC comments on WSAM

From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 14:00:16 -0400
To: WS-Addressing <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>, ws policy <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Message-id: <4613E7B0.3070706@coastin.com>
It seems there is quite a bit of discussion on the meaning of an empty 
assertion, when that assertion is defined to allow nested
assertion types.

One way for wsa to totally avoid this interpretation question is to 
define the Addressing assertion in such a way that one
and only one of the following three nested assertions MUST be present in 
any alternative using the Addressing assertions:

to indicate any restrictions on response EPR types.

I attach this new proposal for discussion :

Tom Rutt

Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133

Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2007 18:00:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:16 UTC