Re: [Uri-review] draft-merrick-jms-uri-01.txt

Hi Eric,

On 2/27/08, Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com> wrote:
>  Specifically, in the introduction, change this:
>
>  "The "jms" URI scheme is used to designate a javax.jms.Destination
>  object and an associated javax.jms.ConnectionFactory object, and
>  optionally provide additional information concerning the way that the
>  Destination object is to be used. Probably the most common, ..."
>
>  To this:
>
>  "The "jms" URI scheme is used to designate a javax.jms.ConnectionFactory
>  object and associated javax.jms.Destination objects, and optionally
>  provides additional information concerning the way that the Destination
>  objects are to be used.  The operations which can be performed on the
>  ConnectionFactory and Destination resources are defined by the JMS
>  specification and so a detailed description is outside the scope of this
>  specification,

You don't get off the hook that easily 8-)  The registration requires
documentation of the operations.

I wonder if we're talking about the same kinds of operations though:
would the JMS operations be ones that could be invoked remotely?
Because that's what the registration template is asking for, e.g. HTTP
GET for http:, FTP RETR for ftp:, etc... A quick look at the JMS
Javadocs for ConnectionFactory and Destination doesn't reveal any
application layer operations such as those AFAICT.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
_______________________________________________
Uri-review mailing list
Uri-review@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review