- From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:34:22 -0500
- To: Mark Little <mark.little@arjuna.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
I don't see enough information yet to justify a separate issue; both question the purpose and utility of the Action property. If you'd like to raise a new issue, please provide more information, and differentiate it from this one. Thanks, On Nov 5, 2004, at 11:12 AM, Mark Little wrote: > I'd prefer to have this as a separate issue. If we decided to drop > wsa:Action (which I doubt), then i017 is superfluous. If we decided to > keep it in some form, then it's not. > > Mark. > > On 5 Nov 2004, at 13:31, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> Can we consider this as part of i017, or is it really separate? >> >>> i017 Purpose of the Action property >>> Why is it neccessary to be able to specify a non-default Action? Why >>> are non-unique Action headers allowed? What is the relationship >>> between the action value and the operation name? >> >> (Also, please include a description of the issue along with "NEW >> ISSUE"; otherwise, we'll just have a monster "NEW ISSUE" thread. :) >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> On Nov 5, 2004, at 3:41 AM, Mark Little wrote: >> >>> Not exactly sure of the wording you'd require, but here goes: >>> >>> I'd like to propose raising a new issue on the utility of wsa:Action >>> and its presence in a specification about addressing. >>> >>> Mark. >>> >>> >>> ---- >>> Mark Little, >>> Chief Architect, >>> Arjuna Technologies Ltd. >>> >>> www.arjuna.com >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist >> Office of the CTO BEA Systems >> >> > > -- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:34:30 UTC