- From: Burdett, David <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 14:10:21 -0800
- To: "'jdart@tibco.com'" <jdart@tibco.com>, "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Cc: "'Assaf Arkin'" <arkin@intalio.com>, Patil Sanjaykumar <sanjay.patil@iona.com>, Ricky Ho <riho@cisco.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
- Message-ID: <C1E0143CD365A445A4417083BF6F42CC053D1898@C1plenaexm07.commerceone.com>
Yes, and I do not want to stop that. On the other hand if we are putting forward a proposal of the pros and cons, then it might be easier to do that off-line and cause less "noise" on the list, and the work was done by the more active participants. We could then: 1. Produce a proposed summary 2. Review the summary 3. Carry out a straw poll. Chairs? Any comments? David -----Original Message----- From: Jon Dart [mailto:jdart@tibco.com] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 2:04 PM To: Burdett David Cc: 'Assaf Arkin'; Patil Sanjaykumar; Ricky Ho; public-ws-chor@w3.org Subject: Re: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario] I would be willing to do that, but isn't W3C generally that technical discussion is public? --Jon Burdett, David wrote: > Assaf/Jon > > Would it make sense for to work together on the pros and cons of each > approach and then jointly submit it to the group? > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 1:23 PM > To: jdart@tibco.com > Cc: Patil Sanjaykumar; Burdett David; Ricky Ho; public-ws-chor@w3.org > Subject: Re: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario] > > > Since this would effect what the language looks like, I suggest we take > a straw poll on this issue and also list all the > objections/issues/concerns that members have regarding a particular > approach they can't live with. Then see how to proceed from there. > > arkin > > Jon Dart wrote: > > > > > I've discussed this internally with my colleague Bill Eidson, and we > > think it is ok to have the choreography depend on abstract WSDL. The > > implication is that you need to have a WSDL binding to whatever > > message format and/or protocol you are using. I realize others may > > have different opinions. > > > > --Jon > > > > Assaf Arkin wrote: > > > >> The question is, is there any technical justification for doing 3 > >> instead of 1 because at the end of the day inspite the additional > >> layer introduced by 3 it makes our job easier? > >> > >> arkin > > > > > > > -- > "Those who can, do; those who can't, make screenshots" > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Assaf Arkin arkin@intalio.com > Intalio Inc. www.intalio.com > The Business Process Management Company (650) 577 4700 > > > This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee and > may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. > If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this > communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication > in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments > and notify us immediately. >
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 17:10:28 UTC