- From: Stephan Poehlsen <poehlsen@itm.uni-luebeck.de>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:28:11 +0200
- To: Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>
- CC: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Hello, On 2010-08-18 Gilbert Pilz wrote: > Doug, > > Your changes look good. The whole "disambiguate the Notification WSDL > from other WSDL docs" problem is just another strike against > Notification WSDLs as far as I am concerned . . . As an outsider (since I am not in the RA-WG) in the first place I did not see the reasons why you specify two solutions: Notification WSDLs and EventDescriptions. In addition, for me it is not clear why a wrapped and an unwrapped notification exist. These redundancies increase the complexity for interoperable implementations only, don't they? From the phrase "is just another strike against Notification WSDLs" I can assume that there exists a longer discussion. Can you point me to any results of that? I am interested in it, because I am currently considering how to provide metadata about SOAP-over-UDP multicast "events". Stephan
Received on Thursday, 19 August 2010 09:29:53 UTC