I think that this definition is different enough, and succinct enough, to deserve its own number. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:04 PM To: David Orchard Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org; www-ws-arch-request@w3.org Subject: RE: Sync Definition #2 (corrected) Appologies if these definitions have not already been proposed, the thread is simply too long for me to catch up:) synchronous message exchange (applies to oneway as well as request/response) requires that both sender and receiver, or initiator and respondant, processes are running/active at the same time as the exchange takes place. In the case of request/response, the exchange is synchronous if both sender and receiver remain in the running/active state for both the request and response. asynchronous message exchange (also applies to oneway or request response) does not require, but does not preclude, that both sender and receiver, or initiator and respondant, processes are running/active at the same time as the exchange takes place. It typcally requires some form of mediation between the sender and receiver such as a message queue. I believe that we could extend these definitions to whole conversations as well. Cheers, Christopher Ferris Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com phone: +1 508 234 3624Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:39:13 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT