W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Providing a short name for single-request-response MEP

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:59:45 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F192B05@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hi Mark,

<snip/>

> Well, HTTP won't have a problem with a 3-month duration transaction
> if the service uses the 202 (Accepted) response code.
> 
> And that brings up an issue with the "request-response" name; when using
> the default binding, the response can actually be a response to the
> "acceptance" of the message.  I don't think that means we need a new
> name, but I do think that we should point out that a "response" isn't
> always the result of processing.

Nevertheless, there is a causal relationship between request message and
response message. It may not be the last-word on whatever processing is
motivated by the receipt of the request message, and further interactions
may be necessary to 'figure' that out, but that's off in the space of
whatever teh SOAP application is.

I think an interesting question is whether a response signifies that the
processing described in part 1 section 2 has been (is being) carried out -
even if a consequence of that processing is some deferred opration that may
take some time to complete.

> MB
> -- 
> Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
> http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com

regards

Stuart
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 08:00:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT