> > Would it be better if the policy definitions stuff was moved to the > binding-ws module so it can be shared by all runtime impls? Don't know > if there are any problems with doing that, can you see any issues > before i go try? > > ...ant >
I would say no as the definitions.xml file is a statement of the properties of the binding implementation rather than the binding model. For example, it's likely that the RI implementation doesn't support asynInvocation while the Axis based binding does. I'm guessing you would like to include it as it provides ws support with few dependencies. For the time being though it doesn't seem too much to ask for the user to specify it as an extension. Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
