OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-rx message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [ws-rx] i089 - a revisted proposal


Doug,

I have two questions on this most recent proposal:

    * Since the threads continue on your earlier proposal, I'm wondering
      which one you consider current?  That is, did this one take over
      though many of us are responding to earlier versions?
    * I don't understand how this proposal addresses one of the
      important issues I have heard discussed in this TC.  Whether or
      not the problem is addressed in this TC, there might be an issue
      with GetQuoteResponse (to use your example) content that was
      expected on the anonymous URI back-channel but was not available. 
      The original GetQuote may be acknowledged without completing the
      higher-level GetQuote / GetQuoteResponse MEP.  If I understand
      your proposal correctly, you are suggesting the GetQuoteResponse
      would be used instead of the anonymous URI back-channel, not after
      a specific back-channel is no longer available?  Is that correct? 
      If so, it seems very inefficient because it requires an additional
      Request / Response exchange for every higher-level response,
      including those responses almost-always available in time for the
      anonymous URI back-channel.

thanx,
    doug

On 27/04/06 07:49, Doug Davis wrote:
> Based on feedback we've received I've attached an updated proposal for 
> i089.  The basic idea is still the same but I think we've cleaned 
> things up quite a bit and eliminated some of the confusion that some 
> people thought the old proposal introduced.  This one is pretty small 
> and still addresses all of the use-cases we've heard about.  The 
> biggest change is that we've made it more clear that GetMessage is 
> designed to simply (re-)establish a transport-specific back-channel, 
> nothing more.
> (sorry, no cute poem :-)
> thanks,
> -Doug


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]