The intent should be called "conversational", rather than
"conversation". You are right that it isn't defined in the policy spec,
but is rather defined in the assembly spec (line 817 of the input spec).
The semantics of an intent specified on an interface is found on line
902 of that specification -- it translates into required intents on any
service or reference that uses that interface. This definition should
be in the policy spec, not the assembly spec. I'll raise an issue in
the Policy TC.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Johnson [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:40 PM
To:
Subject: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 6: JMS bindingType and conversation intent
Logged as http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-6
Peshev, Peter wrote:
> TARGET:
> JMS Binding Specification Version 1.1, Working Draft 25 September
2007
>
>
> DESCRIPTION:
>
> The current bindingType of the jms is defined as :
>
> <bindingType type="binding.jms" alwaysProvides="jms"
> mayProvide="atLeastOnce atMostOnce ordered conversation"/>
>
> I couldn't find the conversation intent in the policy spec. Is this an
> issue for the policy TC or perhaps should be removed from here ?
>
>
> PROPOSED SOLUTION
> Drop it
>
>
>
>
