[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [wsrp-wsia]=?utf-8?B?UkU6IFt3c3JwLXdzaWFdW0kjMTA2XSBQcm9wb3NlZCByZXNvbHV0?==?utf-8?B?aW9uOiBVbmlxdWVuZXNzIG9mIEVudGl0eSBIYW5kbGVz?=
Rich, I believe we should not define entityHandle to be scoped to something that is optional. What happens if no registration was done? I believe this should be scoped to "registrationHandle". Actually, to go even further, I would say that registrationHandle should be just named "consumerHandle", or maybe "consumerId" to denote its persistence, because it may not even have created through a registration process. -----Original Message----- From: Gil Tayar [mailto:Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com] Sent: Sun, October 27, 2002 13:43 To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [wsrp-wsia][I#106] Proposed resolution: Uniqueness of Entity Handles Issue: 106 Title: Uniqueness of Entity Handles Resolution Date: 10-Nov-2002 Status: Tentative resolve Proposed Resolution: Draft v0.81 (small grammar update) describes an entityHandle in section 7.1.4 as "An opaque and invariant handle, unique within the context of the Consumer’s registration, which the Producer is supplying for use on future invocations targeted at the new entity." ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC