RE: Formal objection to the binding of [reference properties] in SOAP

Sorry, it was a +1 to the FORMAL OBJECTION.

The sorts of issues raised, and, in particular, the asymmetry between the wsa:To and other headers had been a source of some discomfort to us, and the formal objection articulates the concerns very well.

We hope it is followed up,
Many thanks,
Nilo
P.S. For some reason the email with the formal objection was never delivered to my inbox. I wonder if others had the same problem as well. In that case, perhaps many do not even know of its existence unless they browse the mail archives (as I sometimes do).


> -----Original Message-----
> From: paul.downey@bt.com [mailto:paul.downey@bt.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 1:02 PM
> To: Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS); public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Formal objection to the binding of [reference 
> properties] in SOAP
> 
> Nilo,
> 
> was that +1 to the formal objection or
> Philippe's reply?
> 
> - it's not possible to tell from the threading in my mail or 
> on the archive.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Nilo 
> Mitra (TX/EUS)
> Sent: 18 May 2005 17:51
> To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Formal objection to the binding of [reference 
> properties] in SOAP
> 
> 
> +1
> 
> Nilo
> 
> Nilo Mitra
> Ericsson, Inc.
> desk: +1 212-843-8451
> mobile: +1 516-476-7427 
>

Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2005 17:15:42 UTC