Scott,
Scott Werden wrote:
> I agree with Sunil's conclusion that the poll operation should not be in the
> soap body but his discussion raises some other issues. The issue of Body vs.
> Header is really orthogonal to WSDL. Having a WSDL description of the RMP's
> poll service may be desribable even if the operation is in the header. I can
If it is a Header, one can always define it in the (WSDL) SOAP Binding section
for that PortType/Port.
Alternatively, we should use the WSDL Annotation stuff which is pending (I'll
work on it after we close this issue) on my AI list.
>
> see this being useful, for instance, if there is an intermediary (or proxy)
> that needs to know about all the services that an endpoint will be
> providing. Additionally, how is the SOAPAction header being set without a
> WSDL? We have no RM field to specify that.
Scott, could you clarify what SOAPAction has to do with RM?
-Sunil
>
>
> Scott
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sunil Kunisetty [mailto:]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 10:34 AM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [wsrm] [REL-XX]Proposal for POLL RM-Reply Pattern
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Attached is my document with my comments and requirements list.
> >
> > -Sunil
> >
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
