W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > February 2007

Re: Ignorable assertions and interoperability

From: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:43:30 -0000
Message-ID: <015501c755c6$a7bc4e90$c301020a@sberyoz>
To: "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Thanks Umit... I think my concerns have been mostly addressed as part of today's discussion in this thread. 
Cheers, Sergey

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Yalcinalp, Umit 
  To: Sergey Beryozkin ; public-ws-policy@w3.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:26 PM
  Subject: RE: Ignorable assertions and interoperability


  The more accurate wording is that the ignorable assertions are not designed to introduce wire level artifacts, rather than interoperability. 

  Would that address your concern? 




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sergey Beryozkin
    Sent: Tuesday, Feb 20, 2007 2:52 AM
    To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
    Subject: Ignorable assertions and interoperability


    Hi

    During the latest concall it was recommended to advise not to use ignorable assertions if the interoperability would be affected...I thought it was a strong statement at a time. 
    The reason for that was that I was assuming at a time a WS-Policy level interoperability was referred to.
    Most of the time it's obvious what interoperability the spec/primer texts refer to, but I feel it would be useful to revisit (in the primer and guidelines) all references to the 'interoperability' terms and qualify them as appropriate...

    Cheers, Sergey Beryozkin
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 14:42:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:47 GMT