- From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 17:40:04 +0200 (MEST)
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, David Hull wrote: > Attached please find a sketch of a binding of the one-way MEP to email, > taking the existing email binding note as a starting point. As one > would hope, the meat of it is in the mapping between properties and > email content (Table 2) and in the mapping of error conditions to SOAP > faults (which I've completely punted -- but then am I required to do > anything?). I'm not sure that the one way MEP is adapted for an email binding, especially if you have all the machinery to do protocol-level correlation. While there is not a big issue to have multiple receivers for a true one way message (as there is no way to do correlation, so you know that there is NO chance that you will get faults or replies), but for something like email where you may have, via the message id a way to correlate request and responses, it seems quite problematic to say that it is one-way. -- Yves Lafon - W3C "Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."
Received on Monday, 4 September 2006 15:40:56 UTC