[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg]
Changing the name makes sense but won't there be a concern for existing implementations? Of course, we are already doing much more violence to DeliverySemantics, so why worry here? Regards, Marty ************************************************************************************* Martin W. Sachs IBM T. J. Watson Research Center P. O. B. 704 Yorktown Hts, NY 10598 914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287 Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com ************************************************************************************* Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com> on 11/06/2001 12:47:43 PM Please respond to Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com> To: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS cc: david@drummondgroup.com, arvola@tibco.com, ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 12:13:26 -0500 From: Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com> If we change TimeToLive to an interval, we also need to add the time the message was originally sent to the header if it isn't there already. It seems to me that having it as an absolute time was the right decision; it's just that the name is misleading. What about changing the name to ExpirationTime or something? (I don't think it's more jarring to change the name than to change the meaning of the value.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC