- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:33:23 -0500
- To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
- Message-id: <43CD1C53.6080805@tibco.com>
Section 3 begins by stating "This section defines the information model and syntax of message addressing properties." However, not long after that, we state that "The basic interaction pattern from which all others are composed is "one-way"." and go on to discuss request-response and more exotic variants. This has always bothered me for several reasons, for example: * This has nothing to do with the information model and syntax of MAPs * As far as WSA is concerned, one-way and request-response are both primitives on an equal basis. If that's not entirely clear, consider the amount of effort we've put into dealing with the anonymous address. * The quotes around "one-way" suggest that we're weaseling our way around the semantic issues of message delivery and MEPs, which we are. * The discussion of extended patterns of interaction suggests that we are defining an extensible framework as opposed to building blocks that can be used within one's choice of framework. I would propose deleting this non-normative paragraph entirely. Anything useful it says to the effect that "reply messages may be sent as part of other message exchanges as well ..." should be said in section 3.3 and/or in the WSDL binding where we discuss the binding of the MAPs.
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 16:33:32 UTC