RE: [wsn] Value/weight added by WSRF

["Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>]

Title: Message

>>  So, regardless of whether we specify the semantics explicitly in BaseN as separate operations or as constraints/restrictions on the  

>>  ResourceProperties, the work is pretty much the same.  My position is that I would prefer to reuse WSRF for as much of this as makes sense. 
 

Steve/David, 

 

Would it make sense to scope the relationship to WSRF by specifying exactly what particular parts of WSRF are used by which particular WS-Notification operations. This would make the specification firm and exact in the sense that we will then not have to deal with the numerous possibilities enabled by WSRF, while allowing the intended reuse of WSRF.

 

The changes to the specification will be such as -- remove the blanket statements such as "MUST also support the required message exchanges defined in the WS-ResourceProperties specification and MAY support the optional message exchanges defined in the WS-ResourceProperties specification." and define the dependency only within the contexts where  WSRF is actually used.

 

 

Thanks,

Sanjay