RE: Was resolution of CR4 nullified by resolution of CR15?

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Anish Karmarkar
> Sent: Monday, Feb 13, 2006 5:16 PM
> To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
> Subject: Was resolution of CR4 nullified by resolution of CR15?
> 
> 
> While working on the 'amalgamated proposal' for CR20, I 
> realized that we 
> removed the text that we added/changed for CR4 [1], as a 
> resolution of 
> CR15 [2]. Is that correct, or am I just looking at the incorrect ed. 
> versions?

It seems to me that this is an oversight and we did not see how the
resolutions will trip into each other. 



> 
> The resolution for CR4 is quite important for WSRX (to allow 
> things like 
> AcksTo with 'anon' address.) 

Yes, this is why I reported this in the first place. Thanks for catching
it! I like the original wording which got discarded and we need to
retain the definition. 

> If I'm looking at the right version and 
> this wasn't inadvertent, then I would like to raise an issue 
> to add the 
> resolution of CR4 back in the SOAP binding spec.
> 
> {perhaps this is what Bob/Marc were asking about regd. issue 
> CR15 on the 
> call -- the 'such as/example' that was missing}

I agree that we have a problem here. Probably we need to define
"response endpoint" and build the semantics into the defn appropriately.



> 
> -Anish
> --

Bob, can we get this to the agenda soon? 

--umit

> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Oct/0111
> [2] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Jan/0085
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 01:29:36 UTC