- From: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 22:14:22 -0500
- To: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Cc: mark.little@arjuna.com, public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Paul,
Why would someone need to shovel "foo" there? According to the current
spec, you can either define your own value and attach it to the WSDL using
the wsa:action attribute, or (provided you claim to support WS-Addressing)
a value is derived for you based on the WSDL definition of the
operation/message. No need for using "foo" anywhere.
Paco
<paul.downey@bt.com>
Sent by: To: <mark.little@arjuna.com>
public-ws-addressing-req cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
uest@w3.org Subject: RE: WS-Addr issues
11/05/2004 12:40 PM
Mark
> So Paul, you'd be happy to see it as an optional part of the spec?
i'm open to hear any arguments against making it optional, but am inclined
to think making such fields mandatory meaningless given some folks will
end up having to shove "foo" values when they don't want to use it at all.
However, i'm concerned that arguing to removing it altogether will
only impede our progress.
Paul
Received on Sunday, 7 November 2004 03:40:16 UTC