[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR33 - Re: [ws-rx] NEW Issue back-channel not defined
+1 Thanks! Paul Matthew Lovett wrote: > OK, so how about: > > Add to the glossary: > Backchannel: When the underlying transport provides a mechanism to return > a transport-protocol specific response, we refer to this mechanism as a > backchannel. > > Matt > > Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com> wrote on 13/12/2006 21:15:33: > > >> Matt >> >> I still don't agree that this is right. I think there may be cases where >> > > >> there is a new transport level connection. The main point is that the >> response channel is transport-defined not WS-A defined. >> >> Paul >> >> Matthew Lovett wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I found the last suggestion a bit cumbersome, so I has another go. I >>> > hope > >>> people like it :) >>> >>> Add to the glossary: >>> Backchannel: When the underlying transport provides a mechanism to >>> > return > >>> a transport-protocol specific response without initiating a new >>> connection, we refer to this mechanism as a backchannel. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Matt >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Paul Fremantle >> VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 >> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair >> >> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle >> paul@wso2.com >> (646) 290 8050 >> >> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com >> >> >> > > > -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]