- From: Richard Katz <richkatz@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:21:12 -0700
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hello Hugo, I have a question regarding the abstraction. Is it fair to say that that there are certain SOAP message supports for the use cases that you would want to document even in an abstracted form? For instance, to implement request-acknowledge in an asynchronous stateless protocol, you need some kind of message ID to refer to? Even if you don't implement in stateless asynchronous and even if it's not a SOAP protocol requirement it seems intuitive that it is still a requirement to be able to identify the original message in some way. Regards, Rich Katz Hugo Haas wrote: > Hi Martin. > > * Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com> [2002-07-16 15:09-0700] > > <shield-UP> > > Considering the harvesting work and the interesting REST discussions, > > aren't these scenarios a bit SOAP specific for publication? > > Is there anyway to make these generic without loosing info and > > without prejudicing current and future discussions? > > </shield-UP>)> > > Agreed. That was actually one of the comments made by someone, I > think. > > An editorial note should (will) be added to that effect, mentioning > that the use cases should be abstracted. Actually, it may even be > better to mention that in the status section. > > I will have a look at it. > > Thanks for the comment. > > Regards, > > Hugo > > -- > Hugo Haas - W3C > mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/ - tel:+1-617-452-2092
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2002 11:08:20 UTC