[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: EbMS Conf Call Question for you
Mappings a to e make sense to me. Dale -----Original Message----- From: Ric Emery Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:20 AM To: Dale Moberg Subject: EbMS Conf Call Question for you Dale, On the conference call this week, the committee wondered if the CORE-70 has been resolved to your satisfaction? See the issue description below, and Jacques resolution. Thanks, ric CORE-70 Issue (Pending Review & Edit) Source: Dale Moberg, Axway/Cyclone <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg-comment/200605/msg00000.h tml Description: The MEP definitions do not map well to business transactions as defined in ebBP or in UMM. A request-response pattern should not require fundamentally different ebMS MEPs depending on how it binds to the underlying protocol. It is unclear how the MEPs that were available in ebMS2, map to V3 MEPs. Owner: Jacques Resolution: 09/13/2006: First part of issue (MEP binding) addressed in WD 14. Second part (v2-v3 mapping) addressed in draft Compatibility Appendix; see "CM4" section, to be included in WD 15.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]