Re: Exchange type issue

Monica J. Martin wrote:
>
>> Steve Ross-Talbot wrote: Monica,
>> I take your point about religiosity. As regards clarity around the  
>> new exchange type and semantics I do not think it changes the  
>> semantics of anything in WS-CDL at all. Rather it makes explicit  
>> something that is today implicit. So in a sense it tidies things up.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Steve T
>
> We have yet to consider that the only difference is the 'respond' is 
> not tied to a 'request.' Therefore, this could be accommodated by 
> allowing a respond that may or may not be tied to a request. As Gary 
> said there is no other difference.  Thanks.
>
True, there is no other difference. However, having the new exchange 
type makes explicit the exchange pattern represented by the choreo. As 
there is no semantic difference, I see no logical reason not to have the 
new exchange type.

-Charlton.