W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > July 2004

Re: "operation name" .. an alternate proposal

From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 13:34:16 -0700
Message-ID: <40EDAFC8.8030708@webmethods.com>
To: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org

David Booth wrote:

> At 12:31 PM 7/8/2004 -0700, Prasad Yendluri wrote:
>
>> . . . My preference would be towards a mechanism that captures [the 
>> operation name] in the message itself . . . .
>
> I agree that this would be conceptually cleaner layering, having the 
> message body include all and only the information that is semantically 
> relevant to the application (since the operation name is clearly 
> semantically relevant if it is used to dispatch).  However, my 
> perception is that this isn't the direction the industry winds are 
> blowing. 

I know. It might still be worth a try :)

Regards, Prasad
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2004 16:37:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:32 GMT