Re: [ebxml-msg] Re: SyncReply Module

[Doug Bunting <dougb62@yahoo.com>]

We agreed to make this change, narrowing the scope of the existing syncReply attributes.

 

----- Original Message -----

From: David Fischer

To: Christopher Ferris

Cc: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org

Sent: Monday, 19 November 2001 12:56

Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Re: SyncReply Module

This is a totally new requirement which violates our v1.1 charter.  I have no problem with extending the ebXML headers with namespace qualified elements but now you are talking about extending our spec for situations where WE are the extension headers to something else.  This is something we might visit for v2.0 but it is FAR BEYOND our v1.1 charter.

 

- David.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 2:30 PM
To: Rich Salz
Cc: David Fischer; ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Re: SyncReply Module

IMO, it is important that it not be precluded, or else it really isn't SOAP.

Cheers,

Chris

Rich Salz wrote:

3BF96936.2C49DD0D@zolera.com type="cite">

How can there be SOAP nodes in our path which do not understand
MessageHeader? How would it route/forward?

It might treat the ebXML message as opaque data, and use something like
the new SOAP-Routing protocol.  Something like
	MH --> "Signing Service" --> "Logging Services" --> MH...

I don't know how important it is to be able to do that.
	/r$