Tom,
I do not have an opportunity prior to Tuesday's meeting to propose an
alternative. That is not good because I get very confused midway through
this email as to how you are proposing to resolve the various issues I have
described. We may do better to talk about the features WS-Reliability
provides in direct terms rather than mapping that language to WSDL. That
is, we can talk about which RM-Reply patterns support or disallow consumer
payloads, when those payloads are returned (carried over the wire).
Your text seems to move further toward tying the WS-Reliability protocol's
use of the underlying transport to the producer / consumer interface
choices. This seems to be heading in the wrong direction.
thanx,
doug
On 18-Jun-04 12:24, Tom Rutt wrote:
...
