RE: [wsi_wsbasic] Re: WS-AddressingMetadata Maintenance Issue: (re: [wsi_wsbasic] BP 20133: proposal 1)

[dropping WS-I mailing list]



Thanks to everyone for their information on use of and intent around WS-AddressingMetadata policy assertions. The ownership of this substantive issue should be addressed by the WS-Addressing WG. mo


From: Yalcinalp, Umit [mailto:umit.yalcinalp@sap.com]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 6:25 PM
To: Gilbert Pilz
Cc: Rogers, Tony; ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; Anish Karmarkar; Rama Pulavarthi; Monica Martin; Bob Freund; ylafon@w3.org; public-ws-addressing@w3.org; Jitendra.Kotamraju@Sun.COM; Ram Jeyaraman; wsi_wsbasic@mp.ws-i.org; Fabian Ritzmann
Subject: RE: [wsi_wsbasic] Re: WS-AddressingMetadata Maintenance Issue: (re: [wsi_wsbasic] BP 20133: proposal 1)

Given that we have established the WS-Policy perspective and thanks to Anish, the occurance of this issue despite non-parametric assertions (which leads to domain-specific handling), it seems to me that this issue should be addressed by the WS-Addressing wg. I would agree with Fabian there, since the semantics, attachment and the types are defined by WS-Addressing, so would the conflict avoidance or resolution, there of belong to WS-A.

My two cents,

--umit

...continued