How does this relate to the assertion that the IRP is too tightly bound
up with its WS-Addressing embodiment?
Steve Graham wrote:
Folks:
Please see:
http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/05/.
This is a submission request to the
W3C by BEA, IBM, Microsoft, SAP and Sun to submit WS-Addressing to W3C
as input to the standardization process.
I would like to recommend that we
consider
using WS-Addressing as submitted to the W3C in our work in WS-RF and
WS-N.
Note, our use of WSDL 1.1 (which was a submission to W3C, just like
WS-Addressing is now) is a precedence for this sort of pre-requisite.
I formally move that we use
WS-Addressing
as our only means of reference mechanism. In particular, I propose that
we avoid abstracting the reference mechanism, such as BPEL has done, in
light of this submission of WS-Addressing to W3C. Note, this minimizes
the perturbation to the currently specified message exchanges, and
reduces
migration impediments for implementations that are building to the 1.1
and 1.2 versions of our specifications.
sgg
++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++
|