- From: Bob Freund <bob@freunds.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:47:52 -0700
- To: johannes.echterhoff@igsi.eu
- Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
We are scheduled to discuss 6917 at our face to face this week. thanks -bob Chair, WS-RA WG On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Johannes Echterhoff wrote: > Hi. > > Was usage of WS-Topics (whether fully or in a profiled form) already > discarded by the working group? If yes, what were the reasons to do > so? > > Best regards, > Johannes Echterhoff > > > > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource- >> access-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Li, Li (Li) >> Gesendet: Montag, 3. August 2009 18:33 >> An: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org >> Betreff: Re: Issue 6917: preliminary proposal for Event Tags; tag >> values >> >> Gil, >> >> Thanks for the proposals. I have a few questions below. >> >> 1) After your revisions to the event tags, they now look very much >> like >> SAWSDL, another W3C spec [1]. Would you consider adopting it >> instead of >> inventing a new one? >> >> 2) WSDL already has a construct called port type that can group event >> types (operations). If WSDL 2.0 is used, you can even get an >> interface >> hierarchy (sort of like topic tree). Should we reuse this structure >> for >> identifying event types as well? >> >> 3) Your examples attach event tags to the <wse:eventType> element >> devised in a proposal to issue 6401. Do these examples suggest the >> event >> tags can only be used in that element and therefore this issue >> (6917) is >> dependent on issue 6401? >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sawsdl/ >> >> >> Li >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 17:48:34 UTC