W3C home
Mailing lists
Public
public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org from May 2005
by thread
89 messages
:
Starting
Monday, 2 May 2005 17:32:05 UTC,
Ending
Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:19:58 UTC
Sort by
:
thread
author
date
subject
Mail actions
:
mail a new topic
Help
:
how to use the archives
search the archives
Re: [Editorial][SOAP] IRI for SOAP 1.2 Module and SOAP 1.1 Extension
Mark Nottingham
(Friday, 20 May)
WS-Addressing LC Issue 57 Closed
Marc Hadley
(Friday, 20 May)
Re: WS-Addressing LC Issue 57 Closed
Arun Gupta
(Monday, 23 May)
WS-Addressing LC Issue 73 Closed
Marc Hadley
(Friday, 20 May)
Last Call Issues #46
Vikas Deolaliker
(Wednesday, 18 May)
Lc66: Presentation of typing information in element decsriptions
Katy Warr
(Tuesday, 17 May)
Re: Question regarding cardinality of [destination]
Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS)
(Tuesday, 17 May)
Re: Question regarding cardinality of [destination]
Rimas Rekasius
(Tuesday, 17 May)
WS-Addr LC Issue 34 Closed
Marc Hadley
(Monday, 16 May)
Comment from WSDL group on ReplyTo
Glen Daniels
(Monday, 16 May)
WS-Addr LC Issue 33 Closed
Marc Hadley
(Friday, 13 May)
WS Description WG comments on WS-A (editorial)
Jonathan Marsh
(Friday, 13 May)
LC Editorial Comment for WS-Addressing Core Specification
Yalcinalp, Umit
(Thursday, 12 May)
IRI escaping when constructing a reply
Jonathan Marsh
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- XML infoset representation of EPR > Information model
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - what is a 'request' and what is a 'reply'?
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- immutability of MAPs
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- How does one extend the abstract properties of an endpoint reference
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - section 2.1 -- unclear wording regarding conflicts between metadata (editorial)
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - section 2.1 -- what does 'each of the EPRs' refer to
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- Notational conventions not explained
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core, inconsistent use of 'Endpoint Reference' (ed nit)
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- requirement of XML 1.0
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - ed nit - section 1.2 (references)
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
WS-Addressing Core, section 1.1 editorial nit
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
Editorial nit regd Example 1-1 in Core
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
Editorial nit - WS-Addressing Core
Anish Karmarkar
(Thursday, 12 May)
lc13 closed
David Orchard
(Wednesday, 11 May)
lc7 closed
David Orchard
(Wednesday, 11 May)
Re: [Editorial][Core] Section 4
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 11 May)
Re: [Editorial][Core] Section 4
Davanum Srinivas
(Wednesday, 11 May)
Comments on WS-A SOAP Binding
Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS)
(Wednesday, 11 May)
LC Comment: (editorial) Security implications of [message id] in re-transmissions
David Hull
(Wednesday, 11 May)
Comments on WS-A Core
Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS)
(Wednesday, 11 May)
Uniqueness of [message id]
Hugo Haas
(Wednesday, 11 May)
LC Comment (Core and SOAP): Security model is insufficient
Marc Hadley
(Wednesday, 11 May)
[message id] should be optional
David Hull
(Tuesday, 10 May)
introduction of MAP and MEP terms
paul.downey@bt.com
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: introduction of MAP and MEP terms
Paul Downey
(Monday, 9 May)
WS-Addressing Last Call issue 64 closed
Bergersen, Rebecca
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: WS-Addressing Last Call issue 64 closed
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 10 May)
lc59 Missing xml namespace prefix declaration
Winkler, Steve
(Monday, 9 May)
LC45 and LC47 closed.
Martin Gudgin
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: LC45 and LC47 closed.
Davanum Srinivas
(Monday, 9 May)
RE: LC45 and LC47 closed.
Martin Gudgin
(Monday, 9 May)
LC42,43,48,49,51 closed
Martin Gudgin
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: LC42,43,48,49,51 closed
Davanum Srinivas
(Monday, 9 May)
lc32: effect of wsa:IsReferenceParameter on validation
Jeff Mischkinsky
(Monday, 9 May)
RE: Editorial: Wording clarifications in Core Section 4
Jonathan Marsh
(Monday, 9 May)
RE: [Editorial][Core] Table 3-1
Jonathan Marsh
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: [Editorial][Core] Table 3-1
Davanum Srinivas
(Monday, 9 May)
RE: [Editorial][SOAP] MessageId vs MessageID
Jonathan Marsh
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: [Editorial][Core] Example 3-1 lc40
Robert Freund
(Monday, 9 May)
Re: [Editorial][Core] Example 3-1 lc40
Davanum Srinivas
(Monday, 9 May)
LC Comment: (editorial) Processors unconstrained in the face of non-compliant messages.
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: Message compliance
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: When is a fault/reply expected?
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: "... the processor MUST fault" in section 3.2 is vacuous.
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment:(editorial) Use of mustUnderstand=1 in example
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: (editorial) Definitions of MAPs in core section 3 should have their own subsection
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: Rewriting by intermediaries
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: Multiple reply relationships
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: MAPs in EPR reference params
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: Supported faults
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC Comment: Uniqueness of [message id]
David Hull
(Thursday, 5 May)
lc28 Mixed notation and indirect terminology for MAPs (Closed)
michael.eder@nokia.com
(Thursday, 5 May)
LC 30 (Formal definition of wsa:isReferenceParameter) is resolved
Yalcinalp, Umit
(Tuesday, 3 May)
Another Security Consideration
Jonathan Marsh
(Tuesday, 3 May)
LC:14 Clearer wording for Table 3-1
Vikas Deolaliker
(Tuesday, 3 May)
What does core section 3 actually require?
David Hull
(Tuesday, 3 May)
Re: What does core section 3 actually require?
Mark Nottingham
(Tuesday, 3 May)
nonNegativeInteger or duration for RetryAfter
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
content of fault detail
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
mandatory fault reason
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
mandatory action
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
mandatory ReplyTo, handling replies in WS-Addressing
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
no mustUnderstand extensibility
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
dereferencing namespace URI - but no link (editorial)
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
Re: dereferencing namespace URI - but no link (editorial)
Mark Nottingham
(Wednesday, 11 May)
presentation of typing information in element descriptions
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
use of IRIs in WS-Addressing
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
RE: use of IRIs in WS-Addressing
Jonathan Marsh
(Tuesday, 24 May)
ws-addressing LC review editorial comments
Jacek Kopecky
(Tuesday, 3 May)
Re: Clarify which fault if SOAP Action and wsa:Action don't match (SOAP, substantive)
Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS)
(Monday, 2 May)
WS-Addressing Last Call Issue 36 closed used your proposed resolution
Bergersen, Rebecca
(Monday, 2 May)
Re: SOAP Binding & Core: Interaction between Faults and [message id] and [reply endpoint] etc.
Prasad Yendluri
(Monday, 2 May)
Re: Last Call Comment (Core): WS-Addressing restricted to XML 1.0 or not?
Prasad Yendluri
(Monday, 2 May)
Re: Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec man date a dispatching model?
Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS)
(Monday, 2 May)
RE: Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec mandate a dispatching model?
Tim Ewald
(Tuesday, 3 May)
Last message date
: Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:19:58 UTC