- From: Damodaran, Suresh <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 15:19:12 -0500
- To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, "ECKERT,ZULAH (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" <zulah_eckert@hp.com>
- Cc: "WSA W3C Public (E-mail)" <www-ws-arch@w3c.org>
Mark, Actually, I do agree with your basic concern expressed below - reliable messaging alone does not ensure reliable "processing" of web services. The earlier discussions went down the rat hole because we spent much energy in beating reliable messaging, which I think is an essential element here. How about we say D-AR019.1.3 Web Services Architecture will incorporate support for reliable invocation of Web Services. "invocation" will require reliable messaging, and reliable execution of any choreography, correct interpretation of semantics, etc. The biggest basket you can find. Cheers, -Suresh -----Original Message----- From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:57 PM To: ECKERT,ZULAH (HP-Cupertino,ex1) Cc: WSA W3C Public (E-mail) Subject: Re: Seeking closure on D-AR019.1.1 and D-AR019.1.3 [snip] > D-AR019.1.3 Web Services Architecture will incorporate support for reliable > messaging. I've made my objections well known. Here's some alternatives I could live with; .. will not preclude support for reliable messaging .. will support the ability for components to reliably coordinate tasks over an unreliable network. This may include solutions such as reliable messaging, the definition of a coordination language, other as-yet-unidentified solutions, or some combination thereof. Basically, I'd like the wording to not imply that the best way in which to achieve reliability over a network, is to ensure that every message is delivered reliably. Thanks. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 16:19:09 UTC