Title: Message
Mike,
If I understand your question correctly, I think you have addressed this
in your latest interface write-up. As long as what flows back and forth across
the interface are arbitrary keys (tokens), then the Producer has a some freedom
in mapping those keys to underlying Session objects.
Eilon
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Freedman
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002
1:23 PM
To: Eilon Reshef
Cc: 'Carsten Leue';
;
Subject: [wsrp-wsia] Re:
[wsrp-interfaces] RE: [wsia] Sessions
Eilon,
Can you elaborate on your conclusion that we shouldn't
enforce a model? I am not really sure how we can have our cake and eat
it too. Either our model requires a key or its doesn't or its a hybrid
that allows both. I would prefer not doing that later as it seems messy
in the interface (and complicates it).
-Mike-
Eilon Reshef wrote:
Carsten and
team,Attached are some additional thoughts on sessions - in particular
how people may want to use sessions in a different way that I am not sure
works very well with our current approach.Eilon
-----Original Message-----
From: Carsten Leue [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002
11:16 AM
To:
wsia; WSRP; ;
Subject: [wsia] Sessions
As promised (though a bit late) here is a sketch of my
current
understanding of the notion of
sessions.
(See attached file: Sessions.zip)
Best regards
Carsten Leue
-------
Dr. Carsten Leue
Dept.8288, IBM Laboratory B鐽lingen , Germany
Tel.: +49-7031-16-4603, Fax: +49-7031-16-4401
