W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2001

RE: Proposed Framework Text for F2F (was RE: TBTF: In-context Fra mework Intro.)

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 21:26:47 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F19277E@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Henrik Frystyk Nielsen'" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
Cc: Chris.Ferris@sun.com, fallside@us.ibm.com, gdaniels@macromedia.com, highland.m.mountain@intel.com, hugo@w3.org, jones@research.att.com, marc.hadley@sun.com, ohurley@iona.com, ylafon@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org
Folks,

Sorry to be dumping this all in your in-trays... hopefully a third and final
version. The merging of the two paragraphs that Henrik noticed required a
slight tweak to Noah's ednote to refer to a single paragraph above rather
than two.

Changes are: merged paragraphs and tweak to the ednote.

Regards

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen [mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com]
> Sent: 20 November 2001 21:11
> To: Williams, Stuart; Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
> Cc: Chris.Ferris@sun.com; fallside@us.ibm.com; 
> gdaniels@macromedia.com;
> highland.m.mountain@intel.com; hugo@w3.org; jones@research.att.com;
> marc.hadley@sun.com; ohurley@iona.com; ylafon@w3.org; 
> www-archive@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed Framework Text for F2F (was RE: TBTF: In-context
> Framework Intro.)
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I missed something but I thought the following two paragraphs
> should be combined to one:
> 
> "The combination of the SOAP extensibility model and the SOAP binding
> framework provides some flexibility in the way that particular
> featuresand MEPs can be expressed: They can be expressed 
> entirely within
> the SOAP envelope (as blocks), outside the envelope (typically in a
> manner that is specific to the underlying protocol), or as a 
> combination
> of such expressions.
> 
> It is up to the communicating nodes to decide how best to express
> particular features and MEPs; often when a binding-level 
> implementation
> for a particular feature is available, utilizing it when appropriate
> will provide for optimized processing."
> 
> Futhermore, isn't the ednote addressed at this text and not at the
> bottom paragraph? Shouldn't the ednote be place after the text above?
> 
> Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
> 



Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 16:28:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:14 GMT