W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > August 2003

RE: Issue: Synch/Asynch Web services

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:42:30 -0600
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E4063B5A9A@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 1:29 PM
> To: Christopher B Ferris
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org; www-ws-arch-request@w3.org;
> www-wsa-comments@w3.org; ECKERT,ZULAH (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
> Subject: RE: Issue: Synch/Asynch Web services
> 
> 
> 
> Ummm -- this is really a confusing response.  

I liked the way this thread started, with Roger suggesting that

<definition>
http//lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2003Mar/0146.html 
A request/response interaction is said to be asynchronous when the
request and response are chronologically and procedurally decoupled. In
other words, the client agent can process the response at some
indeterminate point in the future when its existence is discovered, for
example, by polling, notification by receipt of another message, etc. 
A request/response interaction is said to be synchronous when the client
agent must be available to receive and process the response message from
the time it issues the initial request until it is actually received or
some failure condition is determined. The exact meaning of "available to
receive the message" depends on the characteristics of the client agent
(including the transfer protocol it uses); it may, but does not
necessarily, imply tight time synchronization, blocking a thread, etc.
</definition>

may have a consensus, or at least a supermajority, behind it.  
We'll probably do a straw poll, but does anyone have strong
objections, better ideas, or friendly admendments?

 
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2003 14:42:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:22 GMT