Re: WS-Eventing issue

ok good  :-) 
Do you still think section 2.4 needs some "EPR uniqueness" text ?

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.



David Gregorczyk <gregorczyk@itm.uni-luebeck.de> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
01/05/2011 07:20 AM

To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc
public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject
Re: WS-Eventing issue






> But now there is a little inconsistency regarding to the example
> messages of the WS-Eventing spec. Please have a look at example 4-1
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-ws-eventing-20100805/#Table4) and notice
> the wsa:Address within wsa:ReplyTo and the wsa:Address within 
wse:NotifyTo.
> 
> ReplyTo: http://www.example.com/MyEvEntsink
> NotifyTo: http://www.other.example.com/OnStormWarning
> 
> As you mentioned above, NotifyTo is a unique EPR to distinguish
> notifications and subscription end messages. Now consider example 4-9
> (subscription end,
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-ws-eventing-20100805/#Table12) and example
> 5-1 (notification,
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-ws-eventing-20100805/#Table13).
> 
> Example 4-9 is addressed to http://www.example.com/MyEventSink
> Example 5-1 is addressed to http://www.other.example.com/OnStormWarning.
> 
> Shouldn't example 4-9 also addressed to
> http://www.other.example.com/OnStormWarning to identify the correct
> subscription?

Ok sorry, I just noticed the EndTo EPR. Excuse me! Now everything looks
good. Thank you for your advises!

- David