- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:38:34 +0600
- To: "Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com>, "Jean-Jacques Dubray" <jjd@eigner.com>
- Cc: "'Ugo Corda'" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
"Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com> writes: > WSDL 1.2 has in-out and request-response. The distinction is that for > request-response the response would be sent on the same channel as the > request. There is no such constraint for in-out. So if you are using the > in-out operation with some layer that supports reliable messaging or > coordination you would in fact have signals travelling back and forth. Just to be clear - these patterns are not agreed to in the WG yet. This is still work in progress. My personal feeling is that its better to just have request-response and not say at the abstract level whether or not the response is on the same channel or not. That's a binding characteristic - the abstraction is that there's a request and there will be a response. Take an SMTP binding - every response would be on a separate channel vs. and HTTP binding where the response can be on the same channel. Sanjiva.
Received on Saturday, 21 June 2003 23:38:31 UTC