Re: Providing a short name for single-request-response MEP

what's wrong with simple-request-response

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> The spec editors took an action item to request input on determining the
> name for "single-request-response MEP" described in part 2 [1]. John
> Ibbotson recently brought up the issue that it was not particularly well
> described as to what was meant.
> 
> The editors have taken the feedback and attempted to clarify the text
> (already in [1]) but did not manage to come up with a better short name,
> partly because such names tend to describe single aspects rather than a
> complete picture. Therefore, unless we hear strongly otherwise, the
> proposal is to keep the existing short name.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
> 
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/04/11/soap12-part2-1.55.html#singlereq
> respmep
> 
> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 15:22:59 UTC