- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 15:42:20 -0700
- To: "'Christopher B Ferris'" <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
- Message-ID: <C513FB68F8200244B570543EF3FC65370A855BDB@MAIL1.stc.com>
Just a few comments after quickly going through the new draft: - Section 3.1 and Section 4 "The request/response pattern is also often called the remote procedure call (RPC) oriented interaction style" I thought we already agreed to drop that statement. See thread starting at [1] - Section 3.2.1 "message integrity - one solution is a SOAP Module with encryption" "digital signatures" would be more appropriate here than "encryption" - Section 3.3.1.2 "Packaging" This term has been used in the past within the W3C to indicate the area currently addressed by attachments (see for example [2]) and might create confusion - Section 4 "Intermediaries are allowed to process a message header information only. When processing a message, intermediaries must not disturb the data content, but may add or remove header content. " I guess it depends on what we mean by "disturb". For example, an encryption intermediary must be able to replace sections of the body with their encrypted representation. - Section 6.3.2 "JMS" JMS is not really a protocol, but a standardized Java API put on top of (usually proprietary) MOM protocols. It might still be convenient to use JMS to refer to the collection of all those possible protocols. Maybe a little clarification note would be useful. Ugo [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Oct/0054.html <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Oct/0054.html> [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/07/xml-packaging-charter <http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/07/xml-packaging-charter>
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2002 18:42:53 UTC