[LC107]: WS Description WG comments on WS-A (editorial)
Minutes of the 2005-06-27 teleconference
LC103
Issue LC90
Proposal for i050 : introduction of EPR to indicate 'noReply'
LC68 - Use-cases
Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-06-27
Reference Parameters resolution
Self-describing Messages wrt MEPs
- RE: Self-describing Messages wrt MEPs
- RE: Self-describing Messages wrt MEPs
- RE: Self-describing Messages wrt MEPs
Minutes of the 2005-06-20 teleconference
Re: Requirements for one-way MEP
In the spirit of real-time editing
Proposal for lc87 and lc55
Regrets for 6/20
Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-06-20
New text for sections 3.1 and 3.3 [lc84]
RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
NEW DEADLINE: Third European Conference on Web Services - ECOWS 2005
Minutes of the 2005-06-13 teleconference
Email glitch
Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
- Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?
Proposal for lc75/lc88
- RE: Proposal for lc75/lc88
- Re: Proposal for lc75/lc88
- Re: Proposal for lc75/lc88
- RE: Proposal for lc75/lc88
- RE: Proposal for lc75/lc88
- RE: Proposal for lc75/lc88
How does Message ID coordinate with existing message ID facilities?
- RE: How does Message ID coordinate with existing message ID facilities?
- RE: How does Message ID coordinate with existing message ID facilities?
Message ID use cases:
Minutes of the Berlin F2F
Agenda: WS-A telcon 2005-06-13
RE: wsa:FaultTo unusable for SOAP mustUnderstand faults
- Re: wsa:FaultTo unusable for SOAP mustUnderstand faults
- RE: wsa:FaultTo unusable for SOAP mustUnderstand faults
Re: wsa:FaultTo unusable for SOAP mustUnderstand faults
RE: [soapbuilders] current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?
current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?
2nd CFP: European Conference on Web Services (ECOWS 2005)
Another go at lc75 and lc88 language
- RE: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- Re: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- RE: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- RE: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- RE: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- RE: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language (correction)
- Re: Another go at lc75 and lc88 language