- From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:45:29 -0400
- To: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-async-tf@w3.org>
Hi Mark: > In terms of justification, I think the issue is more > fundamental; the > WS-A charter says that we will define > > > [t]he use of these abstract message properties in the > context of all > > WSDL 1.1 or WSDL 2.0 Message Exchange Patterns, including the > > asynchronous use of these MEPs. > > That's pretty specific; we have to define how MAPs are used in *all* > MEPs asynchronously. > > The issue description can follow from this; in WSDL 1.1, we > we nee to > describe how to do Request-Response or Solicit-Response > asynchronously > with MAPs, and in WSDL 2.0 we need to be able to do In-Out, > In-Optional-Out, Out-In or Out-Optional-In asynchronously with MAPs. > > Because those MEPs and their bindings to particular protocols > need some > work to enable asynchrony, we have some dependancies on that > work being > done. OK, so how about : Our charter indicates that we must specify how the MAPs are to be used in order to achieve asynchrony with all WSDL 1.1 and 2.0 MEPs ([insert list here]). At present there is no interoperable way to do this, partially due to limitations or omissions which exist in the current SOAP and WSDL specs. In order for the WS-Addressing group to declare victory (and build a functional test suite), these limitations/omissions must be remedied. --Glen P.S. With regard to the MEP list above, I assume we also want to add Robust-In-Only to the WSDL 2.0 list. Also, do we want to say anything about using MAPs as the "secret sauce" enabling Out-Only and its ilk?
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 12:45:42 UTC