- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 08:09:17 -0600
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Duane Nickull" <duane@xmlglobal.com>
- cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
I'm happy either way. -----Original Message----- From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 7:43 AM To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); 'Duane Nickull' Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: RE: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary Personally, I think Duane's definition goes to far into design. "receive an event" is design, whereas "able to determine" is a requirement. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:23 AM > To: Duane Nickull > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary > > > > Fine with me, but I fear that the nuance is kind of lost on me, so > perhaps I'm not the right one to decide. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:21 AM > To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary > > > > Suggestion (My $0.02 CAD - take it or ignore it ;-) > > Reliable Messaging: > > 1) The ability: > > (a)of a sender of a message to be able to determine > whether a given > message has been received by its intended receiver and to take > compensating action in the event a given message has been > determined not > > to have been received. > [DN] suggest wording reflect event driven methodology and add "within > set parameters". Without imposing too tight an implementation > constraint, it may be nice to at least suggest an event > driven model. eg > > - change to: > (a)of a message sender to receive verification that a a given > message has been received by its intended receiver within the set > parameters or receive an event-notification that it failed. > > (b)of the intended receiver of the message to be assured that it > receives and processes a given message once and only once. (c)of both > sender and receiver of a message to carry out (a) and (b) with a high > probability of success in the face of inevitable, yet often > unpredictable, network, system, and software failures. 2) > Common Usage: > An acknowledgement infrastructure between application and transport > layers intended to improve messaging reliability as described above. > > > -- > VP Strategic Relations, > Technologies Evangelist > XML Global Technologies > **************************** > ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/ > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 09:11:28 UTC