- From: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:40:11 -0500
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
At 10:20 AM 2004-01-30, Champion, Mike wrote: >I completely agree. The problem is that it is January 30th; the WG charter >ends tomorrow, and we are simply out of time to make *any* substantive >changes to the Note. (Typos, broken links, etc. can be reported and fixed >until Wednesday, I believe). I guess it is up to the editors to add verbiage (perhaps, or do something with @@) in section 4.3 [1], which now reads 4.3 Significant Unresolved Issues @@What is the difference between an MEP and a Choreography? @@What should be the representation returned by an HTTP "GET" on a Web service URI? @@Should URIs be used to identify Web services components, rather than QNames? @@The relationship between privacy and Web services technology needs clarification. @@SOAP 1.2 and this architecture introduce the concept of "intermediaries", but this concept is not represented in WSDL 2.0. @@[wordsmith:] What happens if two WSDL documents define the same service? @@The relationship between conversations, correlations and transactions and choreography is unclear and needs more work. @@There is a need for consistent tracking mechanisms in Web services. ------ I am proposing @@Further work on the relationships between and patterns for using Web services and SOA. (Would be nice to add it if we can, but I understand if it is too late.) [1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/arch/wsa/wd-wsa-arch-review2.html#id5212661 Paul
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 10:40:58 UTC