- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:04:50 -0700
- To: <public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org>
The mixed use of the acronyms URI and IRI is a bit confusing. Sometimes the draft uses IRI, and sometimes it uses URI. However, simply using IRI throughout has problems too. We suggest as a principle for when to use IRI vs. URI that when specific instances of IRIs can be identified as URIs by inspection (e.g. the anonymous URI), and we should call them URIs to make it clear they can be used in any context where a URI is allowed. The types of the properties are rightly described as IRIs, since the range of values is greater than allowed by URIs. Following this principle would result in the following changes: - Last sentence before 1.1: 'Line (010) specifies an action URI identifying expected semantics.' (Note also case correction.) - Last sentence in section 2.2: 'The following shows an example endpoint reference. This element references the endpoint at the URI "http://example.com/www.fabrikam/acct".' (Note also extra "the" removed.) - Section 3 [relationship]: 'The message identifier IRI may refer to a specific message, or be the following well-known URI that means "unspecified message": "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/id/unspecified".' - Table 3-1 heading 'URI'. - Section 3 [relationship]: 'A reply message MUST contain a [relationship] property consisting of the predefined reply URI and the message id property of the request message.' - Section 3 [relationship]: 'WS-Addressing defines the following well-known URI for use by endpoints that cannot have a stable, resolvable IRI: "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/role/anonymous".' - Section 3.1 4th bullet: '[relationship]: a new pair of IRIs is added to this value as follows; the relationship type is the predefined reply URI "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/reply" ...'
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2005 16:04:55 UTC