Sanjiva,

Can you please chime in on the problem itself [1]? Maybe if we
concentrate on the problem in question rather than dissect the
specific solution we will be better off?

thanks,
dims

PS: I changed the subject as well.

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-user&m=115158272830597&w=2

On 7/2/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 08:51 +0100, David Illsley wrote:
> Sanjiva, All,
> I'd still like to make this change. Have you been convinced or do we need
> more discussion?

I think we need more discussion.

Are you suggesting that we ignore a RelatesTo with a relationship type
of wsa:Response or with some other relationship?

I do not agree that its correct for the WS-Addressing logic to ignore a
RelatesTo with a relationship type that *its supposed to understand*
even if the actual message ID is not recognized.

If you are trying to do that, can you explain why you can't do the same
with a custom relationship type?

Sanjiva.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
Davanum Srinivas : http://people.apache.org/~dims/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to