- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 02:49:23 -0800
- To: "Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>, "Francisco Curbera" <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>, <public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org>
There are only two mandatory message properties; [action] and [destination]. I've seen (separate) proposals that both of them be made optional. Given that they are the things that actually turn up in messages as wsa:Action/To, then I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that making one of them optional effectively makes 50% of them optional. But I suspect we're getting off topic ;-) Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@arjuna.com] > Sent: 08 November 2004 10:45 > To: Martin Gudgin; Francisco Curbera > Cc: David Orchard; Marc Hadley; public-ws-addressing@w3.org; > public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org > Subject: Re: Mandator wsa:Action (was Re: WS-Addr issues) > > > <SNIP/> > > > Let's not blow this thing > > > out of all > > > proportion either: I'm not suggesting we make everything > > > optional > > > > Well, you've suggested making 50% of the mandatory things > into optional > > things... There is only one mandatory thing left... And I believe > > someone else has suggested making that optional... > > Taken slightly out of context, wouldn't you say ;-) ? > > Hardly true either: > > [address] : URI (mandatory) > [destination] : URI (mandatory) > [action] : URI (mandatory) > > And reference properties (if that's the other one you refer to) isn't > mandatory. > > Mark. > > ---- > Mark Little, > Chief Architect, > Arjuna Technologies Ltd. > > www.arjuna.com > > >
Received on Monday, 8 November 2004 10:49:58 UTC