That was my concern too, and a rewording
is probably in order for these occurrences:
-
Intro: "...for
reliable message delivery." (could reword as: "...
for reliable delivery of messages".
Section 2: "... a reliable
message exchange"à "...a
reliable exchange of message".
Along the line
of clarifying what "reliable delivery" means concretely, now that the
use of the protocol is not directly linked to DA, I think part of i060
resolution should also reword:
(3.1)
"Messages for which the delivery assurance applies MUST contain a <wsrm:Sequence> header block."
As:
"Messages
for which a reliable delivery is required MUST contain a <wsrm:Sequence> header block."
Otherwise, as worded
today, the implication is that the RMS must be aware of DAs required on RMD
side so that it knows whether or not to use the protocol. I am not one to
complain about that, but find this requirement unnecessary in this context, at
least as long as the status of DAs in this spec is unclear.
I'd have
no issue with an i060 solution that adds these above updates to Chris rewording.
Jacques
From: Christopher B
Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005
5:55 PM
To: Paul Cotton
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] i060 proposal
(which we approved)
Hmmm... I could take a look see. I was only searching
for "reliable message" which was the
term
that jacques was concerned about defining.
Cheers,
Christopher
Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295
"Paul
Cotton" <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote on 12/01/2005 05:25:08 PM:
> Thank you for the proposal and the reference
to the document you
> searched. I am assuming you searched
for "reliable message" to find
> the single change location.
>
>
Unfortunately there are lots of occurrences of the phrase "reliable
> messaging" that are not referring
to the document title e.g.
> "Reliable Messaging" . I
actually searched for "reliable mess".
>
> Do you
think we should deal with some of these as well?
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul
Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17
Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
>
>
>
> From: Christopher B Ferris
[mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: December 1, 2005 5:13 PM
> To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-rx] i060 proposal (which we
approved)
>
>
> Replace the first bullet in section 2.3
Invariants on line 207 of wd06 [1]
>
> The RM Source MUST assign each message to be
delivered reliably a
> message number (defined below) beginning
> at 1 and increasing by exactly 1 for each
subsequent message to be
> delivered reliably.
>
> [1]
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.
> php/15455/wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-06.pdf
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christopher Ferris
> STSM, Emerging e-business Industry
Architecture
> email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> blog:
http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
> phone: +1 508 377 9295