W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-async-tf@w3.org > April 2005

RE: Proposed issue text

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 15:24:23 -0400
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B27F4A47E@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>
To: "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>, <public-ws-async-tf@w3.org>

Hi Anish:

> > P.S.  With regard to the MEP list above, I assume we also 
> want to add
> > Robust-In-Only to the WSDL 2.0 list.  Also, do we want to 
> say anything
> > about using MAPs as the "secret sauce" enabling Out-Only 
> and its ilk?
> > 
> Since, MAPs are in the SOAP message (typically), I'm not sure how it 
> helps enabling out-only. Don't things like SOAP-Response MEP and the 
> corresponding HTTP binding fit the bill here better than MAPs?

Only for the "pull-like" cases.  In many cases, I expect that MAPs (or
at least EPRs :)) will be used to transfer something like a
"notificationsTo" address in an interaction prior to the
server-initiated one(s).  Thus MAPs provide a convenient way to ground
the "magic" without going so far as to specify exactly how it's done for
your application.  I just think we should mention that they can be a
useful tool for these cases.

Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 19:24:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:48:42 UTC