Which one? There are now three versions of WS-Addressing.
Pl. note that the latest version has a new concept of 'Reference
parameters' which is very similar to 'Reference properties' except when
it comes to comparing EPRs.
-Anish
--
Steve Graham wrote:
>
> David:
> Good question. I would recommend that we continue with the IRP
> clarification, but build only WS-Addressing embodiments.
>
> sgg
>
> ++++++++
> Steve Graham
> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> ++++++++
>
>
> David Hull <> wrote on 08/10/2004 03:42:25 PM:
>
> > How does this relate to the assertion that the IRP is too tightly
> bound up with its
> > WS-Addressing embodiment?
> >
> > Steve Graham wrote:
> >
> > Folks:
> > Please see: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/05/.
> > This is a submission request to the W3C by BEA, IBM, Microsoft, SAP
> and Sun to
> > submit WS-Addressing to W3C as input to the standardization process.
> >
> > I would like to recommend that we consider using WS-Addressing as
> submitted to the
> > W3C in our work in WS-RF and WS-N. Note, our use of WSDL 1.1 (which
> was a
> > submission to W3C, just like WS-Addressing is now) is a precedence
> for this sort of
> > pre-requisite.
> >
> > I formally move that we use WS-Addressing as our only means of
> reference mechanism.
> > In particular, I propose that we avoid abstracting the reference
> mechanism, such as
> > BPEL has done, in light of this submission of WS-Addressing to W3C.
> Note, this
> > minimizes the perturbation to the currently specified message
> exchanges, and
> > reduces migration impediments for implementations that are building
> to the 1.1 and
> > 1.2 versions of our specifications.
> >
> > sgg
> >
> > ++++++++
> > Steve Graham
> > (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> > STSM, On Demand Architecture
> > Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> > <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> > ++++++++
