RE: Spec draft
"Newcomer, Eric" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <DCF6EF589A22A14F93DFB949FD8C4AB2BA11EF@amereast-ems1.IONAGLOBAL.COM> |
Ugo, Good comments, thanks. I've seen the +1s too about the first comment and actually I agree about both changes. I'll fix the text, Eric -----Original Message----- From: Ugo Corda [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:40 PM To: Newcomer, Eric; [email protected] Subject: RE: Spec draft Eric, The document looks good to me so far. I have just a couple of comments. - second block of text just below Figure 2, "The request/response pattern is also often called the remote procedure call (RPC) oriented interaction style" It might often be called that way, but I don't think it's a good idea to reinforce that belief here. The interaction style, RPC or document, should be completely orthogonal to the request/response pattern, so that, for instance, I can have a request/response pattern that uses the document style instead of RPC. - just before "Extended Web Services Architecture", "The interaction can be single message one way, broadcast from requester to many services, a multi message conversation, or a business process." Is this an exhaustive list? Probably not. In that case it's better to rephrase it with something like "Examples of interactions are ...". Ugo