RE: Endpoint question

I think that was the intent-- you would not use
allPurpose in conjunction with the specialized
functions for endpoints. (I am a little hazy
whether we allowed multiple allpurpose endpoints
to support redundancy.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:37 PM
To: Arvola Chan
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Endpoint question

I believe that the intention was that the allPurpose endpoint would be
used
if there was no need to differentiate different functions of the
endpoint.
If the team agrees that this was the intent, the text should be fixed
and,
if it can be done, the DTD and schema should be changed to show that the
value is allPurpose or the enumeration of the other possibilities.

Regards,
Marty
************************************************************************
*************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
************************************************************************
*************

Arvola Chan <> on 08/02/2001 01:34:17 AM

To:   
cc:
Subject:  Endpoint question

Section 7.5.14 indicates that a Transport  element may have multiple
Endpoint elements, each of different types. The  question I have is
whether
these types have to be non-overlapping.

Can an Endpoint element of type allPurpose co-exist  with another
Endpoint
element of type Response under the same Transport element?  If so, does
it
mean that a response can be sent to either Endpoint?

Thanks,
-Arvola

Arvola Chan ()
TIBCO Software  (on loan to RosettaNet)
+1-650-846-5046 (US-Pacific)

------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: