- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 01:04:21 -0400
- To: antoine.mensch@odonata.fr
- Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFD8C7B585.59F0097B-ON85257721.001B89B7-85257721.001BDFC0@us.ibm.com>
Antoine,
thank you for opening this issue. The WG discussed it today and we
decided to modify the following sentence in the WSRA specs:
All messages defined by this specification MUST be sent to a Web service
that is
addressable by an EPR (see [WS-Addressing]).
such that it now says:
All messages defined by this specification MUST conform to the
WS-Addressing
specifications and be sent to a Web service that is addressable by an
EPR ( see
[WS-Addressing]).
Please let us know if this addresses your concern to your satisfaction.
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.
bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org
05/10/2010 03:58 PM
To
public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
cc
Subject
[Bug 9699] New: Clarify that WS-Addressing support is required
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9699
Summary: Clarify that WS-Addressing support is required
Product: WS-Resource Access
Version: LC
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: All
AssignedTo: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
ReportedBy: antoine.mensch@odonata.fr
QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
While the specs appear to be written assuming that WS-Addressing must be
used
in all exchanges, it is never stated explicitly. It could be useful to add
such
a statement, either in the compliance section or as an additional section
at
the beginning of the specs.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 05:04:55 UTC