Re: TBTF: Proposed resolution issue 179

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> Looks good - only comment is that "support" may be understood in many
> different--does it mean "define" or "enable", or both? We saw this many
> times in the requirements document [1]. In this case, I think we mean
> both so what about saying "define or enable" instead or something to
> that effect?

Enable maybe. I would hope that there would be less MEPs than bindings - 
or to put it another way I would expect bindings to declare support 
(there's that word again) for one or more MEPs from a common external 
set rather than define its own. For me that was one of the points of the 
binding framework: common features supported by multiple bindings.


>>""A binding specification MUST support one or more Message Exchange 
>>Patterns.  A binding specification MAY state that it supports 
>>in which case the binding specification MUST provide for 
>>maintaining state, performing processing, and transmitting 
>>information in a manner consistent with the specification for 
>>those features."
> Henrik
> [1]

Marc Hadley <>
XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.

Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 05:24:34 UTC