- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 09:11:58 -0500
- To: "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Geoff Arnold [mailto:Geoff.Arnold@Sun.COM] > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:59 AM > To: 'www-ws-arch@w3.org ' > Subject: Re: Transport-specific SOAP semantics - was Re: Visibility > > > > +1. And we need to be consistent with this when [if] we decide to > define "synchronous" and "asynchronous"..... > Could you elaborate? Maybe you mean that the definition of synch/asynch should be independent of the protocol? I think that would help (I'm warming to the synch/asynch topic at long last!). Perhaps if we defined synch/asynch at the level of MEPs rather than protocol-level messages (not to mention implementation details such as "blocking") we might get some agreement. >
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 09:12:01 UTC