This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Harmonization: Description of AttentionLine"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Robert grant (talk | contribs) m |
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
PM has a proposal with InM, Ref #961, for a mechanism to pass parameters into an addressable file queue. Use of the attentionline attribute in a polling message was the suggestion that was offered to us. However, it's not apparent to me that this use would be allowable under the revised definition. [[User:Robert grant|Robert grant]] 11:15, 13 Mar 2006 (CST) | PM has a proposal with InM, Ref #961, for a mechanism to pass parameters into an addressable file queue. Use of the attentionline attribute in a polling message was the suggestion that was offered to us. However, it's not apparent to me that this use would be allowable under the revised definition. [[User:Robert grant|Robert grant]] 11:15, 13 Mar 2006 (CST) | ||
| + | :The Polling message consists of a [[Transmission Wrapper]] only, and carries no semantics, its intent is exclusively related to transmission. Using attentionLine in such circumstances to convey the name of the report that is on a queue is entirely in line with the transmission-oriented nature of attentionLine. In the Canadian polling use-case the value of attentionLine changes the order in which messages are polled, it's value does not however change the contents of those messages. Changing the order of polled messages is uniquely Transmission oriented. On a related topic: polling was redefined in the latest release of MCCI, I haven't heard back from Canadian experts whether it fits their needs. [[User:Rene spronk|Rene spronk]] 02:18, 14 Mar 2006 (CST) | ||
Latest revision as of 08:18, 14 March 2006
PM has a proposal with InM, Ref #961, for a mechanism to pass parameters into an addressable file queue. Use of the attentionline attribute in a polling message was the suggestion that was offered to us. However, it's not apparent to me that this use would be allowable under the revised definition. Robert grant 11:15, 13 Mar 2006 (CST)
- The Polling message consists of a Transmission Wrapper only, and carries no semantics, its intent is exclusively related to transmission. Using attentionLine in such circumstances to convey the name of the report that is on a queue is entirely in line with the transmission-oriented nature of attentionLine. In the Canadian polling use-case the value of attentionLine changes the order in which messages are polled, it's value does not however change the contents of those messages. Changing the order of polled messages is uniquely Transmission oriented. On a related topic: polling was redefined in the latest release of MCCI, I haven't heard back from Canadian experts whether it fits their needs. Rene spronk 02:18, 14 Mar 2006 (CST)
