:-) Yes I will, though I want to see the spec progress a bit before I tidy up what I've got and check it in. David
On 04/06/07, Eran Chinthaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hey, I am sorry If my wording caused you some problem, I didn't mean it :). I am bit worried if some one says company X does so, so we also should do that, without adhering to the spec. > We can not simply change > something because MSFT is doing that or any other company is doing > that. > I hate doing so. > > >> 100% agree. I propose this not because MSFT is doing this. but I saw >> some advantage of doing this in terms of fixing our bugs early as >> possible (once again this does not mean addressing has bugs). >> That is why is I think davids' solution is fair enough. Totally agreed. If there is a bug let's discuss it. Can you please put down the problem and the solution so that we can agree for the final decision. These days there are too much of discussion happening parallel :) BTW, it will be great if we can implement WS-Addressing policies. IIRC, David promised me he will do it, when we met last time ;). We have the required functionality, so David will glue them together. Chinthaka -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGY3ufjON2uBzUhh8RAgO+AJ96Fx3g/Lxx2bjp/D62THJ3QfRiDACcD0V+ BlzZUyNyByJ7gbxzRcnafsY= =svC6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
