Re: [wsrm] Jacques proposal for Respond primitive uploaded

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

This is what is in 1.01J

These updates are only for the issue raised Tuesday,
not about the latest discussions today Wednesday.

Summary:

- TO DO: all figures should have "Respond" operation added from Consumer 
to receiving RMP (not done).

- Section 1.2. Added "Respond" to the list of abstract ops in the QoS 
intro.

- Figure 1: added a sentence refering to it. (and also expanding the 
acronym "RMP" which is only defined later).

- Terminology: added definition for Respond, and extended the def for 
Notify.

- Section 2: added a paragraph on "Correlation between Operations and 
Protocol", and split previous 2.1 in two subsections: new 2.1 about 
messaging protocl, new 2.2 about RMP properties.

- Section 2.2.1: added the correlation between Deliver-Respond and 
req-resp protocol, for the Response reply pattern.

- Section 3.2: All RM features specify that they do NOT concern payloads 
passed via the Respond operation, for this release.

- Section 5.2: more explicit "binding" of WSDL op types, with the 
reliable messaging model (operations Submit/Deliver/Respond...)

Jacques



Tom Rutt wrote:

> I just uploaded Jacques proposal for a Respond Primitive as editing 
> draft 1.01J.
>
> This proposal does not address the most recent concerns on the mailing 
> list, and is not yet agreed.
>
>
> The pdf with diff from editing draft 1.01I is at:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/7188/EditingDraft101Jdiff101I.pdf 
>
>
>
> The open office source is at:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/7189/Contribution-EditingDraft101J-Jacques.sxw 
>
>
>

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