RE: Issue LC50 - MEPs

I see that the WS-Addressing WG is currently discussing the idea of
having WS-Addressing's EPRs that support multiple ports:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0347.ht
ml .

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yalcinalp, Umit
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 3:15 PM
> To: 'Amelia A Lewis'; Sanjiva Weerawarana
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Issue LC50 - MEPs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> >[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> >Sent: Friday, Nov 19, 2004 12:46 PM
> >To: Sanjiva Weerawarana
> >Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> >Subject: Re: Issue LC50 - MEPs
> >
> >
> >
> <snip/>
> >> Whether the respponse arrives by reading the reverse half of
> >a stream
> >> socket, or by reading a POP mailbox, or by opening an HTTP server 
> >> port and reading the POST to it, or by a carrier pigeon delivering 
> >> it, or by a UDP packet etc. is IRRELEVANT details to the client.
> >
> >I agree in principle, but so far as I know, there is no way of 
> >specifying multi-transport operations in WSDL as it 
> currently stands. 
> >Are you suggesting that WS-Addressing or WS-MD or some other 
> mechanism 
> >is already able to define such operations?
> >
> 
> You are right. Since we subject an operation to a specific 
> binding, we are limiting the operation to a single transport 
> mechanism in WSDL 2.0. 
> 
> In WS-MD, the callback "pattern" was invented out of two 
> in-out or two input operations just to enable this capability 
> to preserve the logical relationship between two message 
> exchanges which may involve different bindings. 
> 
> >
> >Amy!
> >--
> >Amelia A. Lewis
> >Senior Architect
> >TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> >alewis@tibco.com
> >
> 
> --umit
> 
>

Received on Friday, 19 November 2004 23:59:46 UTC