- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:27:08 -0400
- To: "Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com>
- Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org, public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org, "Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com>
- Message-ID: <OFD16BFF14.8CE42EC8-ON852576E8.005486E9-852576E8.0054E2F4@us.ibm.com>
You'd think :-) But not all specs that define endpoint subject assertions allow them to be on the portType - for example RM doesn't. So I think we may need to keep it just to be clear. thanks -Doug ______________________________________________________ STSM | Standards Architect | IBM Software Group (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. "Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com> 03/16/2010 11:21 AM To Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS cc <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, <public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org>, "Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com> Subject RE: MOAP is checked Hi Doug, WS-Eventing Section 9.1 paragraph 2 says: This specification defines a policy assertion (wse:EventSource). The wse:EventSource policy assertion applies to the endpoint policy subject. This paragraph defines the scope of the attachment to be ?endpoint subject? and the following paragraph 3 only explains what ?endpoint subject? means. Hence paragraph 3 seems redundant. Thanks, Li From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 11:15 AM To: Li, Li (Li) Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org; public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org; Chou, Wu (Wu) Subject: Re: MOAP is checked Hi Li, for paragraph #5 I agree - seems redundant. For paragraph #3 though, I think we may need to keep that since the assertions we define can't go on all WSDL attachment points, rather they can only be attached to certain ones. For example, I'm not sure what it would mean to attach the wse:EventSource assertion to a message. How about you open up a new issue so we can discuss these? thanks -Doug ______________________________________________________ STSM | Standards Architect | IBM Software Group (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. "Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com> Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 03/16/2010 11:02 AM To <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org> cc "Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com> Subject Re: MOAP is checked I've made all of the updates for MOAP. Please look them over to make sure I didn't miss anything. thanks -Doug Doug: I just have some editorial comments. 1. WS-Eventing Section 9.1 paragraph 3 seems a paraphrase of WS-Policy 1.5 Attachment Sections 4.1.2 and 5.4.2. Paragraph 5 seems a paraphrase of WS-Policy 1.5 Framework section 4.3.1. 2. The same for WS-Eventing Section 9.2 paragraphs 3 and 5. 3. The same for other WS-RA specs, including WS-Enumeration. I wonder if we should avoid repeating or paraphrasing other spec, as we have deliberately removed a lot of WS-Addressing paraphrases from WS-RA. Thanks. Li
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2010 15:27:34 UTC