Suggestion for Rel 119

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

We need exact proposed replacement text, not just an outline.

Sunil, can you provide the exact text changes and new text to go along 
with the new attribute of reply to for poll response?.

Your outline, reproduced below, does not include exact text to include.

Tom Rutt
WSRM Chair

------


    Rel 119 Sunil new Issue on Callback for Poll Request

 

    * *New Issue*
      <http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200402/msg00203.html>
      /From/ Sunil Kunisetty <Sunil.Kunisetty@oracle.com> on 24 Feb 2004
      00:50:10 -0000

New mail from Sunil:

If we do accept this, here are the  changes that we need to do.

 

   1. Add an optional replyTo attribute to PollRequest

   2. pg 6/line 177: Remove the replyTo attribute for Poll pattern in 
Request  (this may contradict to what I said in the editorial comments...)

   3. pg 7/line 212:Title of Example 3 would read "Acknowledgment 
Message embedded in HTTP Request"

   4. pg 7/line 213:HTTP Headers will have to change (should use POST)

   5. pg 8/line 239:Title of Example 4 would read "Fault  Message 
embedded in HTTP Request"

   6. pg 8/line 240:HTTP Headers will have to change (should use POST)

   7. pg 11/lines 334-339 should be reworded as follows:

 

          We say that Polling RM-Reply pattern is used if a second 
underlying request is issued to the  receiver of a previous message, in 
order to obtain a RM-Reply. The RM-Reply can be either contained in the 
underlying response to this poll request or in a separate underlying 
request from the receiver to the sender. This poling pattern is 
generally expected to be used in situations where it is inappropriate 
for the sender of reliable messages to receive underlying protocol 
requests (behind the firewall cases) or to avoid resending bulk messages 
often.

 

   1. pg 15/Figure 3. The 3rd line should be titled "Underlying protocol 
Response/Request".

   2. pg 28/section 4.3

         1. Table 9: Add an optional attribute call replyTo of type anyURI

         2. We need to mention that RM-Reply MUST be contained in the 
underlying response of the Poll request if this attribute doesn't exist 
and should be sent  in an underlying request to the endpoint identified 
by this attribute if exists.

   3. And finally the schema has to reflect this  by adding an optional 
attribute to the PollRequest element.

 

 -Sunil
------

Sunil moves to accept his proposal and to add the clarification below:  
Seconded by

Jishu

clarify that reply to is not allowed for a poll and response reply 
pattern request.

 

No opposition, accepted.

 


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt		email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133