Re: [wsrm] message headers for Ack and Fault ??

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

Sunil Kunisetty wrote:

>>  
>>
>> <JD> I understand that this messageHeader serves a purpose in Responses,
>> but still that seems quite contrived: we apparently use it only for 
>> matching
>> the ReplyPattern elements between req and resp.
>> I believe our design would be tighter if we added the returned 
>> ReplyPattern
>> to the RM:Response element, as Sunil hints at as a possible alternative.
>>
>  +1 ;-)

I take this to mean that you, Sunil, have no problems with the reply not 
having its own message ID.

If such is the case, an alternative to putting the reply pattern in the 
respons is to have a separate header element
defined for a poll response.  This new heeader could have a schema to 
convey fault info as well as a list of delivered messag ids.

>>  
>> Further, I believe the ReplyPattern element in a request, would be 
>> more at its
>> place in the RM:Request element, as it should be associated with the 
>> element
>> that has "request semantics".
>
>  +1
>
>>  
>> Doing so, the MessageHeader element would only contain ID and general 
>> message info,
>> and would only need be included in "reliable messages", as
>> the second sentence in 3.1. clearly suggests already (at odds with 
>> current usage).
>> Later on when we have RM:Response piggybacking on business messages, 
>> the info in
>> messageHeader would be totally orthogonal to the info in RM:Response.
>>
>> jacques
>>  
>>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt		email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133