RE: Request optional Response HTTP Binding

The reason I didn't call it an "extension" was it would be unclear which
is the extension.  If I say "request optional response http binding
extension", it could be perceived as an extension to the request
optional response http binding.  The most accurate name I could think
of, which is way too long, is "request optional response http binding
extension to soap 1.1 http binding".

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mbaker@gmail.com [mailto:mbaker@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Baker
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 11:45 AM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: WS-Addressing
> Subject: Re: Request optional Response HTTP Binding
> 
> Looks good, Dave.  Volcanoes averted!
> 
> Actually, there's one comment that I should have made earlier.  This
> document doesn't prescribe a complete binding, just an extension to
> other bindings (as you note by the use of the word "refinement" in the
> abstract).  I'd suggest changing the title to "binding extension", or
> something similar.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark.
> 
> On 1/23/06, David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a request optional response binding for status code 202:
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.       http://www.markbaker.ca
> Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com

Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 20:31:05 UTC