- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 05:43:58 -0800
- To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
(1) There is a lot of interest in removing message along the lines that Roberto has proposed. However, there is concern that this might make the bindings more complicated, or at least eliminate shortcuts a binding could take (HTTP GET binding parts as parameters, for instance). We're working up some detailed examples. My impression is that if nothing nasty turns up the proposal has a good chance of being accepted. (2) We have a full game plan on MEPs now - we adopted changes into the syntax and component model, and decided which MEPs we would provide and document (7). My belief is that this issue is pretty much settled, modulo a lot of new text that needs to be created and reviewed. (3) Basically, zero progress at FTF. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:36 PM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: where are we? > > > Hi Guys, > > There are three big issues that are in my mind that I was hoping > would get resolved or directed at this last F2F. They are: > > (1) What to do about <message> > > (2) What to do about message-exchange/interaction patterns and > outbound operations as a result of that decision > > (3) Some direction for the features/properties (and context/policy) > stuff > > I can see from the minutes that (3) got deferred; which makes fine > sense to me. I cannot quite tell whether no meaningful progress > was made for (1) and (2) or whether we have some direction on > those. Can someone please help me understand the status? > > Thanks, > > Sanjiva.
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2003 08:44:50 UTC