- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 17:44:32 +0200
- To: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
Hi, as an LC comment for WS-Addressing, I'd like to voice my support for either using nonNegativeInteger or duration for RetryAfter timeout (section 5.5 in WS-Addressing SOAP binding), as opposed to unsignedLong or unsignedInt which impose unnecessary restrictions (even though perhaps reasonable, 64 bits for milliseconds should be enough for everyone 8-) ). Further, the default is set to "infinite", presumably to signal that the receiver does not expect the endpoint ever to become available again. I think this intent should be made explicit in the spec text, without it I, for one, was confused for a while and wanted to suggest a more reasonable default value. So maybe extending the spec like this could help: "If this element is omitted from the detail, the value is infinite, effectively signaling that the endpoint is not expected to become available ever again." In case you wonder, this is the last LC comment from me at this time. 8-) Best regards, Jacek Kopecky Ph.D. student researcher Digital Enterprise Research Institute University of Innsbruck http://www.deri.org/
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 15:45:13 UTC