[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 86 - Proposal For Vote
Ugo Corda wrote: >Shouldn't we be now referring to Basic Profile 1.1 instead of Basic >Profile 1.0? > >Ugo > > mm1: Good suggestion Ugo. Thank you. >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:Monica.Martin@Sun.COM] >>Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 1:53 PM >>To: wsbpeltc >>Cc: Furniss, Peter >>Subject: [wsbpel] Issue - 86 - Proposal For Vote >> >> >>Proposal to vote, Issue 86 SOAP v1.2 >> >>Change in Section 3.0: >> >>Change From: >>"With respect to [WS-I Basic Profile] (Basic Profile 1.0) all BPEL >>implementations SHOULD be configurable such that they can >>participate in >>Basic Profile 1.0 compliant interactions. A BPEL implementation MAY >>allow the Basic Profile 1.0 configuration to be disabled, even for >>scenarios encompassed by the Basic Profile 1.0." >> >>Change To (add two sentences): >>"With respect to [WS-I Basic Profile] (Basic Profile 1.0) all BPEL >>implementations SHOULD be configurable such that they can >>participate in >>Basic Profile 1.0 compliant interactions. A BPEL implementation MAY >>allow the Basic Profile 1.0 configuration to be disabled, even for >>scenarios encompassed by the Basic Profile 1.0. Future >>versions of the >>WS-I Basic Profile may support the W3C SOAP v1.2 Recommendation and a >>subsequent WSDL v2.0 when complete in W3C. It is not the objective of >>this specification to define or require that particular protocol >>bindings be supported by compliant implementations." >> >>Thanks. >>Submitted by: Ron Ten-Hove and Monica J. Martin >> >> >>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from >>the roster of the OASIS TC), go to >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/le >> >> >ave_workgroup.php. > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]