- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:11:54 -0700
- To: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Amelia A Lewis [mailto:alewis@tibco.com] > Sent: 13 July 2004 17:03 > To: Martin Gudgin > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Re: Action Item 2004-07-01 Solution to 168/R114 > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 07:13:53 -0700 > Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com> wrote: > > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org > > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl > > > Sent: 13 July 2004 15:05 > > > To: 'WS Description List' > > > Subject: RE: Action Item 2004-07-01 Solution to 168/R114 > > > I would much prefer that WSDL 2.0 does not allow this > > > situation to occur. > > > > Then WSDL 2.0 will not be able to describe a certain class > of service. > > Which is a deep, serious problem. Oh yes! > > > > As > > > I read the requirement (114), we are tasked with providing a > > > mechanism to > > > ensure that this does not occur. > > > > Then I think the requirement is wrong. > > In fact, Tom's interpretation of the requirement is not > necessarily the > correct one. > R114 may be taken to read as "permit authors to indicate > this" rather than "require authors to indicate this". I agree with you. However, I note David Booth said, earlier in this thread: "However, I think the precise wording of R114 is somewhat irrelevant. The real question is what does the WG think we need." > If it > is "permit", > we're done. Yes, in this case RPC style is sufficient. > If it is "require", then there will be > significant opposition > to selection of any particular dispatch algorithm, which in turn means > that the indication of a dispatch algorithm must be "open", > which means > that I can define mine as "none://of.your/business/". > > The client can trust that the service *will* dispatch the message, > somehow. How, is not information necessary to the client. Absolutely! Gudge > > Amy! > -- > Amelia A. Lewis > Senior Architect > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. > alewis@tibco.com >
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 12:12:13 UTC