Hi Andrea,
On 3/20/07, Andrea Smyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What is the connection between the <wsrm:reliability> element and the RMAssertion? Is the timeout attribute in <wsrm:reliability> element synonymous with the InactivityTimeout in the RMAssertion? I would like to see the above way of configuring WS-* features in sync with the configuration of these features as envisaged in their resp. specs, both at the data level (i.e. reuse of the RMAssertion type for example) and for aggregation purposes (use WS-Policy to specify optionalities, requirements, express alternatives etc.).
Don't take my <wsrm:reliability> as a specific proposal for WS-RM configuration syntax. I think we should continue to use the RM policy type which you've been using. Why not allow <wsp:Policy
xmlns:wsp="http://www.w3.org/2006/07/ws-policy";> child elements in <jaxws:client>?
The benefit is that a FooWSFeature class has an opportunity to configure the Client/Bus/Server. This means that a user won't have to add all the interceptors themselves, the WSFeature can just take care of it. I agree that we should reuse the Policy configuration wherever possible. BTWwhat is actually jaxws specific about these features - or the
client/conduit injection for that matter? It should be possible to inject a conduit into any kind of client (and configure its WS-* features) - JAXWS or not. JAX-WS 2.1 introduced the concept of WSFeature classs (I think that was
the name at least). I want to figure out what is in that spec so they can align nicely. However, all the javadocs/specs have been pulled temporarily so I can't really check to see what is going on there. Cheers, - Dan -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
