Re: One-way messaging in SOAP 1.2

Yves,

There's nothing in the spec (part2) that suggests
that Section 7.1 is meant as merely an example of
a (T)MEP definition. Similarly, there is nothing in
the spec to suggest that the HTTP binding defined
in section 8 is intended to be an example, and it
references the URI that is identified as the URI
for the (T)MEP defined in section 7.1.

Neither are examples, they should have w3c.org domain
scoped URIs.

Cheers,

Chris

Yves Lafon wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Edwin Ortega wrote:
> 
> 
>>>I don't think that the URIs we're defining for the definition
>>>of the single-request-response MEP is meant as an example,
>>>I believe that it is meant as a normative definition that can
>>>be referenced by other/future binding specifications.
>>>
> 
> As I said it is for example, to have a real MEP definition that use URI in
> W3C workspace, URI will exist and be deferencable (like namespaces for
> instance).
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2002 12:52:40 UTC