Michael, Before WS-Addressing was submitted to the W3C for standardization, the WS-MessageDelivery embodiment was added to WS-Resource. The WS-Addressing working group in the W3C took input from both the WS-Addressing specification and the WS-MessageDelivery specification, so the result of that working group reflects requirements from both specifications. At this point, the WSRF TC is considering removing the WS-MessageDelivery embodiment.
At this time I recommend that all work be based only on WS-Addressing until the TC makes a decision. Bryan Murray -----Original Message----- From: Michael Marks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 7:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Quetsion about different WS-Resource Referenz Embodiments Hi all together, I have read the new draft of the WS-Resource Spezifikation (wsrf-WS-Resource-1.2-draft-03.pdf at OASIS TC). There is a section wich defines different kinds of WS-Resource Access Pattern Embodiments. There are two dynamic Embodiments for WS-Resource References defined: one based on WS-MessageDelivery and another using WS-Addressing Endpoint References. I wonder, why there was defined a new Embodiment based on WS-MessageDelivery while a dynamic embodiment using WS-Addressing EPR already existed. Are there advantages by using the WS-Resource Reference based on WS-MessageDelivery against the using of WSA-EPR s? I know, that's no question concerning the implemention of Apollo, but I thougt this will be the right place to ask, because you are working against the WSRF Specs while implementing the Apollo Framework. Thanks in advance! Michael --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
