- From: Geoff Arnold <Geoff.Arnold@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 00:10:24 -0500
- To: "Newcomer, Eric" <Eric.Newcomer@iona.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 09:53 PM, Newcomer, Eric wrote: > Apologies for appearing to suggest we don't need definitions of these > terms for the glossary. Of course we do. I was just impatient with > the seemingly endless debate... > While it is not always the case, I find that many "endless debates" of this kind are actually important exercises in taking a machete to the undergrowth of unwitting assumptions. In the case of "[a]synchronous", I think we've done at least four things: - clarified the distinction between an MEP and the applications programming model used to implement an agent (e.g. in examining notions like "wait", "active" and so on) - raised the issue of two-party vs. N-party interactions - flushed out a couple of potential protocol dependencies (e.g. in references to "same connection") - made it less likely that we'll have to revise all of this when choreography rears its head These seem worthwhile to me, even though they could have been accomplished a bit quicker. (And I know I haven't exactly helped.... mea culpa.)
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 00:11:00 UTC