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

RE: Minutes of MEP Task Force 2004-11-23

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 05:03:12 +0100
Message-ID: <99CA63DD941EDC4EBA897048D9B0061D0F676D09@uspalx20a.pal.sap.corp>
To: "'Amelia A Lewis'" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amelia A Lewis [mailto:alewis@tibco.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, Nov 24, 2004 19:42 PM
>To: Yalcinalp, Umit
>Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
>Subject: Re: Minutes of MEP Task Force 2004-11-23
>
>
>On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:26:37 +0100
>"Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com> wrote:
>> Are you suggesting that we allow utilization of WSA with the
>> additional third-party in-out MEP ONLY (if we were to provide it in
>> the note) or assume that its also possible to use it with the in-out
>> MEP? 
>
>I would suggest that best practice is:
>
>If WS-A or WSMD is used with the current in-out MEP, the service is
>expressing an expectation that the out message is being routed to the
>node-originator of the in message.
>
>If WS-A or WSMD is used with the third-party MEP (not currently in the
>spec), the service is expressing an expectation that the out 
>message MAY
>be routed to a node which is not the node-originator of the in message.
>
>> I am just trying to find out everyone's expectations here, since I
>> missed the last concall. 
>
>Did that clarify any?

Plenty. I was not clear whether restricting the usage addressing with in-out was implied and it is not. 

Happy Turkeys, 

>
>Amy!
>-- 

--umit
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2004 04:03:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT