Re: [dss] Asynchronous Profile wd01

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

At 04:11 PM 4/19/2004 +0200, Andreas Kuehne wrote:
>Hi  TC,
>
>attached you'll find a first approach of the Asynchronous Processing profile.
>
>Suprisingly it turned to be a bit more core-protocol-invasive than I 
>expected :
>Either we allow profiles to extend the protocol with new requests for 
>polling or we relax the given requests to accept a call with no input 
>given except the RequestId attribute. I decided for the latter ... 
>discussions welcome ...

Instead of relaxing Requests to contain no input, and Responses to contain 
no output, I would suggest adding new protocol messages:

C->S: SignRequest
C<-S: PendingResponse (or SignResponse)

C->S: PendingRequest
C<-S: PendingResponse (or SignResponse)
...

This stretches the definition of a profile, but loosening the core 
protocols to allow empty messages seems worse.  This is more similar to 
XKMS, too.


Minor editorial things:
  - you could add "Abstract" into the title, as in "Asynchronous Processing 
Abstract Profile..."
  - the document identifier should probably be lowercase, with no spaces, 
for consistency
  - the footer needs updating
  - the table of contents needs updating
  - Introduction, 1st sentence: change "The resulting profile..." to 
"This..." or something
  - The schema namespace identifier could be all lowercase, for consistency 
with other profiles
  - In 1.2, you could assign a namespace prefix to the new namespace
  - In 1.3, 1st paragraph, I don't think it's necessary to mention 
timestamping explicitly
  - If the client indicates support for this profile, is 
<ResponseMechanism> necessary?


Trevor