ebxml-msg — archive
RE: [ebxml-msg] Messaging Spec v1.092
MHonArc v2.5.2 -->ebxml-msg message
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Messaging Spec v1.092
- From: "Burdett, David" <[email protected]>
- To: 'Dale Moberg' <[email protected]>,"Burdett, David" <[email protected]>,David Fischer <[email protected]>, Martin W Sachs <[email protected]>,Jacques Durand <[email protected]>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 09:37:04 -0800
Title: RE: [ebxml-msg] Messaging Spec v1.092
Dale you said ...
>>>Also, for you SOAP fans, if you are concerned with interoperability, please just explain why having a notation for marking things with a mustUnderstand, with a response carrying a SOAP fault, promotes interoperability in itself? Is this the "right way" to do negotiation-- by a trial and error search through the power set of combinations of SOAP modules of interest, until you find a combination that works and is acceptable to you?<<<
Absolutely YES, if the probability of first time success is high, which it could be with the right default values for parameters.
David
PS I am not anti-CPA, I just want them to be used in the right way.