W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2001

Re: comments on 30/3/2001 AM draft

From: Marc J. Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:36:09 +0100
Message-ID: <003301c0bc43$390c1de0$0a01a8c0@default>
To: "christopher ferris" <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Hi Chris,

> 7) Section 5 doesn't have a section defining/declaring the three binding
> "operations" (OP, MSG and ERR).
I didn't want to get into discussing binding operations because this could
be easily confused with XMLP operations which each map to several binding
operations. Instead I left operation to mean the same thing as at the XMLP
layer, i.e. "a single instance of a message exchange pattern", or a set of
OP.xxx, MSG.yyy and possibly ERR.ind primitives. However, now that XMLP_Data
has been removed from the AM, this distinction may not be so important.

I'm not sure exactly what would go in such a section over and above what is
already in 5.1.2.1, 5.1.2.2 and 5.1.2.3 where the primitives are listed ?

> In addition, the disgram in section 5.1.1
> only contains reference to OP and MSG (ERR is omitted). That same diagram
> also refers to OP and MSG as primitives, when in fact they are Binding
Operations
> in the lexicon of the AM.
>
See my comment above. I agree that ERR should be added, do you think we need
to use OP.xxx, MSG.yyy and ERR.zzz to highlight their status as primitives ?

> 9) Something that isn't clear to me is whether the correlation discussed
in section
> 5 is the same as correlation discussed in section 3. In fact, I believe
that
> there may need to be a separation of concerns w/r/t correlation as it
applies
> to individual message exchange and a protocol binding which may support
the
> notion of session. A session may span multiple correlated message
exchanges
> or "conversations".
>
That is how I was thinking of it working. The correlation in section 5 is
purely low level binding specific correlation (e.g. HTTP providing
request-response). There is also a need for XMLP layer based correlation as
discussed in section 3.

Regards,
Marc
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 09:38:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:00 GMT