Eric,
Looks fine to me; addresses Mike's concerns
and those raised on the call. My only concern is from the point of
view of converting that text into a number of standalone conformance statements...
Regards, Simon
Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet -
Eric Johnson <>
20/03/2009 23:45
To
Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc
OASIS Bindings <>
Subject
Re: [sca-bindings] Re: Proposed resolution
to issue 54, attempt #5
Hi,
Attached is attempt #5 at revising issue 54.
There's a good chance that I will not be in next week's call - I'm attending
a conference. As a result, I would much prefer feedback sooner rather
than later, so that I can take a shot at another revision if there are
still concerns.
I believe I addressed both of Mike's concerns below, as well as the discussion
points raised in the conference call.
-Eric.
Mike Edwards wrote:
Folks,
Comments:
1) Regarding the URI for a <service/>.
Points #1 and #4 refer to the structural URI for a service.
I think that this needs clarifying at least. The Assembly spec makes
it clear that a structural URI is a relative URI.
The way things are worded in this proposal seems to imply that it is absolute.
It is certainly not clear how the structural URI
becomes the absolute URI for a Web service.
2) Regarding the URI for a <reference/>
Point #3 says "use the URI indicated
by any contained wsdl:port element"
If there are multiple port elements, each may have a different URI - is
the runtime free to choose any one of these?
Yours, Mike.
Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
Email:
From:
Eric Johnson <>
To:
OASIS Bindings <>
Date:
11/03/2009 22:02
Subject:
[sca-bindings] Re: Proposed resolution
to issue 54, attempt #4
Oops - forgot to incorporate comments from Mike E.
Attempt #4 attached.
-Eric.
Eric Johnson wrote:
> Attached. Integrates all of Simon N.'s concerns, I think.
>
> -Eric.
>
> P.S. My apologies for missing the meeting today. I forgot to
put an
> entry on my calendar for the unusual meeting, and it was all downhill
> from there.
>
[attachment "sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-issue54-proposal-04.doc"
deleted by Mike Edwards/UK/IBM] ---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-issue54-proposal-05.doc
