- From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 14:15:57 -0000
- To: <charlton_b@mac.com>, "'Monica J. Martin'" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
- Cc: "'Steve Ross-Talbot'" <steve@pi4tech.com>, "'Gary Brown'" <gary@pi4tech.com>, "'WS-Choreography List'" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Can someone please tell me the real difference between a notify and a in-only? If I have two participants A and B, when and why would I use notify instead of in-only if B needs to interact with A without a preceeding "request"? Martin. >-----Original Message----- >From: Charlton Barreto [mailto:charlton_b@mac.com] >Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 10:57 PM >To: Monica J. Martin >Cc: Steve Ross-Talbot; Martin Chapman; 'Gary Brown'; >'WS-Choreography List' >Subject: Re: Exchange type issue > > >Monica J. Martin wrote: >> >>> Steve Ross-Talbot wrote: Monica, >>> I take your point about religiosity. As regards clarity around the >>> new exchange type and semantics I do not think it changes the >>> semantics of anything in WS-CDL at all. Rather it makes explicit >>> something that is today implicit. So in a sense it tidies things up. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Steve T >> >> We have yet to consider that the only difference is the 'respond' is >> not tied to a 'request.' Therefore, this could be accommodated by >> allowing a respond that may or may not be tied to a request. As Gary >> said there is no other difference. Thanks. >> >True, there is no other difference. However, having the new exchange >type makes explicit the exchange pattern represented by the choreo. As >there is no semantic difference, I see no logical reason not >to have the >new exchange type. > >-Charlton. >
Received on Monday, 6 November 2006 15:19:49 UTC