Re: [business-transaction] Email votes - 7 Issues - Ends Tues April 9

[William Cox <william.cox@bea.com>]

Stealing text from other messages...


> - Issue 4: Glossary is out-of-date
> YES

> - Issue 61: Tables of send/receives for each role
> YES

> - Issue 87: Conformance Level
> NO.  Per my previous email, I think we need to chew on this one for a
> while longer. Bill Pope's proposed wording gets us part of the way
> there, but consider the conformance testing nightmare.

> - Issue 100: Separation of delivery information from payload
> ABSTAIN - I think that this reflects a deeper need to examine the
> bindings from the abstract to the only concrete model we have.



> - Issue 107: Reply to CONFIRM_TRANSACTION if all is ok

> NO     It seems counterintuitive to have a successful
> CONFIRM_TRANSACTION get a message conditioned on whether
> "report-hazard" is true.  A success is not a HAZARD.  If we want to
> change the name of report-hazard to
> "be-really-really-wordy-and-tell-me-everything-I-might-possibly-want-to-know"
> then this solution makes sense.  :-)

> - Issue 108: Participant and service identification
> NO  Per Bill Pope "I think resolution of this issue is a requirement
> for 1.0 but we're not quite there yet" seems correct..

> - Issue 109: SOAPAction HTTP header must be present
> YES

bill cox

Attachment: william.cox.vcf
Description: Card for William Cox