[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrm] Action item for ReplyTo definition
iwasa wrote: > Sunil and Tom, > > > > > > >> > > > >> With this modification the ReplyTo definition can be modified as > > > >> follows: > > > >> > > > >> " > > > >> > > > > I'd also suggest to remove 'ReplyTo' as a sub-element of > > > > <RM:ReliableMessage> and add it as an _attribute_ to > > > > <RM:AckRequested> sub-element itself so that it won't accidently > > > > be used if <RM:AckRequested> is not used/present. > > > > > > Not sure? > > > > Why? Do you see any problem with it being an attribute? I just > > felt that it is less error-prone when it is an attribute of > "AckRequested", > > which is the only case it is used anyway. > > Agree with Sunil to move "ReplyTo" element to under "AckRequested". > And it looks like you prefer to making "ReplyTo" > an attribute of AckRequested, rather than making it sub-element of > AckRequested. In that case are you proposing to have two attributes > under "AckRequested" element as follows? > - ackPattern attribute : Value is "Response", "CallBack", or "Poll" > - replyTo attribute : Value is URL > Yes, the above is the one I proposed earlier. Infact, It should be okay if ReplyTo is made a sub-element of ' AckRequested' element itself. My main aim is to tie ReplyTo to AckRequested as that's the only case it is used. Whether it is an attribute or sub-element is secondary. Since ackPattern was already an attribute, I preferred it as an attribute. Either both (ackPattern and replyTo) should be attributes or sub-elements. Thanks, -Sunil > > I think this makes sense. > If I understand wrong, please correct it. > > Thanks, > > Iwasa > > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]