- From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 20:23:33 -0400
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Cc: WS-Addressing <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
see inline David Hull wrote: > Tom, > > Before I dig into this in detail, I wanted to point out one thing, which > may or may not matter and is probably more a WS-P issue if it does. > > You say: "I changed the examples to a server policy intersecting with a > client policy." > > I'm not sure that this is a safe change. > I do not understand your scenario. How can there there two policy expressions for the same server that are not the same? Tom > I phrased the original question in terms of two sources of metadata. > One knows something. Another knows something else. We want to combine > that knowledge and figure out what they both know together. For > example, an abstract WSDL says something general and a concrete WSDL > provides more detail. Or we know some things because they're common to > all servers that implement spec X and we know other things because > they're company policy around here. Or there's a minimum service-level > agreement (e.g., you must at least support anon, or you must not support > anon and but you must at least support HTTP callbacks) and the server > provides more capabilities (it supports anon and non anon, or it > supports both HTTP and Jabber callbacks). > > This seems more general than "the client wants this, the server provides > that", though if the WS-P intersection algorithm serves for both, great. > > Tom Rutt wrote: > >> This body part will be downloaded on demand. >> > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 00:23:54 UTC