Re: [issue 6432] - a modest proposal

Thanks for the email and inputs.
 
This is another angle to see the issue and worth pursuing. The feature
that might accommodate both styles of solutions, e.g. the WS-E
Mode/Delivery, and SOAP/mU headers, should be helpful.
 
- Wu Chou.
 
 
From: Bob Freund <bob@freunds.com
<mailto:bob@freunds.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D%20-%20a%20mod
est%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40f
reunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40f
reunds.com%253E> > 
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 20:42:57 -0400
Cc: David Snelling <David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com
<mailto:David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D
%20-%20a%20modest%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-67
3AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-67
3AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E> >, Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com
<mailto:gilbert.pilz@oracle.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D%20-%2
0a%20modest%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BB
DF6B%40freunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BB
DF6B%40freunds.com%253E> >, Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com
<mailto:asirveda@microsoft.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D%20-%20
a%20modest%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBD
F6B%40freunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBD
F6B%40freunds.com%253E> >, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com
<mailto:dug@us.ibm.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D%20-%20a%20mode
st%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40fr
eunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40fr
eunds.com%253E> >, "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
<mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432
%5D%20-%20a%20modest%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7
-673AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7
-673AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E> " <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
<mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432
%5D%20-%20a%20modest%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7
-673AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7
-673AA4BBDF6B%40freunds.com%253E> > 
Message-Id: <23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B@freunds.com> 
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org
<mailto:ylafon@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bissue%206432%5D%20-%20a%20modes
t%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40fre
unds.com%253E&References=%253C23BB170E-9349-4BFE-87E7-673AA4BBDF6B%40fre
unds.com%253E> > 

There seems like there is a big-systems use of notification as well as  
a small-device market for the same protocol.
The difference seems to be the extent to which negotiation protocols  
and additional features might be available.
It sounds like finding a way like this to make both ways possible  
might be what is needed.
-bob

On May 6, 2009, at 4:19 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Apr 2009, Bob Freund wrote:
>
>> Would it be too bold to suggest folks consider to move NotifyTo to  
>> be a child of Subscribe?
>> that way, then Delivery could be used (as an xs:Any) extension  
>> point, used by other specifications to mean anything they want at  
>> at cost of merely setting a SOAP mU header on delivery to get the  
>> fault behavior.  Of course, the fault would change from  
>> modeNotRecognized to SOAP mU Fault, but the other stuff would still  
>> work.
>> Is that half-way-ish approach that folks could consider?
>
> The main issue is still the addition of the mU in the default version.
> How about adding a specific mode (like 'anonymous') that would  
> trigger the use of the other approach.
> That way we would have the "historic" use of mode, and the new  
> version using the same trigger mechanism, allowing old  
> implementation to interoperate with newer ones, while keeping a way  
> to use the new version in all the cases where the old version would  
> not be optimal.
> Would that make sense for both camp ?