- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 13:48:15 -0400
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
David Hull writes: > Hang on. The req-rep MEP has two properties for two messages. > InboundMessage is the request and OutboundMessage is the response. This may explain why we're going in circles, because my reading of the SOAP 1.2 Recommendation is clearly different than yours. Table 6 says [1] of the requesting node: "Initiate transmission of request message abstracted in http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/OutboundMessage ." Table 7 says [2] of the responding node: "Start making an abstraction of the request message available in http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/InboundMessage" and "Initiate transmission of response message abstracted in http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/OutboundMessage." So, I believe my suggestion for what we should do in one-way is entirely consistent with the SOAP 1.2 precedent: we should have a table with sender properties that contains ImmediateDestination and OutboundMessage; we should have a separate table for the receiver with ImmediateSender and InboundMessage. As with SOAP 1.2 Req/Resp, inbound and outbound are always relative to the local node at which the work is being done. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/#tabreqstatetrans [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/#tabresstatetrans -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 17:48:36 UTC