- From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 15:39:35 -0400
- To: jones@research.att.com
- Cc: chrisfer@us.ibm.com, www-ws-arch@w3.org
At 10:41 AM 7/15/2003 -0400, jones@research.att.com wrote: > Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:27:35 -0400 > To: jones@research.att.com > From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org> > . . . > Personally, I think all we need to do is drop the word "SOAP" > and change the word "nodes" to "agent", in order to be more > consistent with the rest of our text: > > "A Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) is a template > that establishes a pattern for the exchange of > messages between nodes." > > From a WS Architecture point of view, I think that definition > nails it. > >I can live with your suggestion, but I think it underspecifies the >architecture. For example, it doesn't provide any architectural >guidance as to the kind of messaging patterns that might be >appropriate in developing specifications for pattern languages, for >bindings, etc. I can see some real potential downsides in trying to >get a clean architecture if some clean sense of layering is not >properly observed. What if an MEP (your definition) doesn't account >for all of the faults or response messages that arise from the >messages within it? I think it would be fine to add such guidance if you think it's a good idea. -- David Booth W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Sunday, 20 July 2003 22:59:26 UTC