[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] i021 proposal update
I don't quite see the problem here. If the WSDL/policy processor sees the RM assertion on the WSDL message and doesn't understand it then it won't even know that RM is supported/required. If the processor does not support message-level assertions then it won't be able to use that endpoint. I'm also not sure how backward compat requirement is relevant here. We are introducing a new QName (distinct from the submission QName) here for the assertion. Either the WSDL/Policy processor understands it or not. The important thing here is that if someone really has message-level assertions and no binding/port level assertion and the RMS does not support/recognize them then it has no information about whether RM is supported/required by the RMD. This is no different than not having the WSDL/policy available. -Anish -- Christopher B Ferris wrote: > > Here is a link [1] to my latest proposal for i021 that complements > Sanjay's proposal [2]. > > [1] > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200603/msg00068.html > > [2] > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200602/msg00222.html > > > Cheers, > > Christopher Ferris > STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440 > phone: +1 508 377 9295
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]