Re: [wsrm] Action item for ReplyTo definition

[Patrick Yee <kcyee@cecid.hku.hk>]

Title:

Hi all,

This is the first time I make a comment here.. hope I am not causing much trouble to you all. :-)

Agree with Sunil to move "ReplyTo" element to under "AckRequested".

And it looks like you prefer to making "ReplyTo"
an attribute of AckRequested, rather than making it sub-element of
AckRequested. In that case are you proposing to have two attributes
under "AckRequested" element as follows?
    - ackPattern attribute : Value is "Response", "CallBack", or "Poll"
    - replyTo attribute : Value is URL

    

 Yes, the above is the one I proposed earlier. Infact, It should be okay
 if ReplyTo is made a sub-element of ' AckRequested' element itself.
 My main aim is to tie ReplyTo to AckRequested as that's the only
 case it is used.

 Whether it is an attribute or sub-element is secondary. Since ackPattern
 was already an attribute, I preferred it as an attribute. Either both (ackPattern
 and replyTo) should be attributes or sub-elements.
  

It's good to tie ReplyTo and AckRequested together. In terms of extensibility, I think it will be more flexible to place ReplyTo as a sub-element. For example, shall we need a secondary ReplyTo address in the future? Will ReplyTo be some logical identifier with type attribute in the future? If so, sub-element will be better.

AckRequested and ReplyTo don't have to be both attributes or both sub-elements, right?

Regards, -Patrick