[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Aligning with Web Services Notification (WSN)
It no better/worse from what we have today as our current notification is also based on a Web Service listener being invoked by regrep server over a SOAP protocol described by WSDL interface definition. David RR Webber (XML) wrote: > Farrukh, > > Hmmmm - the only caveat I see is B2B notifications? > > Although - I assume you are thinking this is transport option driven - > so people could pick delivery via channels - ws, ebxml, smtp, and so on? > > We just need to think through how this covers off all our use cases - > but overall - I concur with the notion that less is more in terms of > leveraging work when we can. > > DW > > "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.) > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [regrep] [regrep4] Align susbcription/notification with Web > Services Notification (WSN) > From: Farrukh Najmi <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com> > Date: Fri, September 14, 2007 3:04 pm > To: ebXML Regrep <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> > > > Team, > > The WSN specs: > > <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsn#technical> > > are now approved as OASIS standard. > > I would like to propose that we align the subscription/notification > feature in RegRep 4 with these specs. The changes would have the > following high level implications: > > * Eliminate several types and elements defined in rim.xsd > * Eliminate NotificationListener*.wsdl files > * RegRep implementations would need to implement or otherwise > provide the following interfaces defined in > <http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/bw-2.wsdl>: > o NotificationProducer > o PullPoint > o SubscriptionManager > * RegRep clients wishing to get notified would need to implement the > following interfaces defined in > <http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/bw-2.wsdl>: > o NotificationConsumer > > While this is a big change I think it makes sense to align with this > standard because: > > * Aligns us with an approved standard > * Reduces our spec content to possibly just profiling WSN specs > * Provides richer more extensible functionality than we currently have > > Please share your thoughts on this proposal. > > Thank you. > > -- > Regards, > Farrukh > > Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com > <http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com/> > > -- Regards, Farrukh Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]