Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers - alternative proposal

 From my standpoint I'm interested in using EPRs to identify how to talk  
to a URI:
for example, to include WSDL-related information for dynamically  
created service instances,
or in a Reply-To where I want people to use, say SMTP...

The information about a way to talk to the URI doesn't uniquely  
identify the URI
because there could be other ways to talk to it,
but it doesn't describe contextual state (like WS-Context) either.

These were things that originally pulled me to WS-MessageDelivery, but
the usage cases for EPRs suggests support in the new WS-Addressing.


On Dec 1, 2004, at 11:05 PM, Mark Baker wrote:

>
> Hey,
>
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 01:00:27PM -0500, Francisco Curbera wrote:
>> Rationale
>> =======
>>
>> EPRs are not identifiers, only addresses. Let me explain.
>
> FWIW, after the RefProps/RefParams discussion, I now agree that EPRs
> are not necessarily identifiers.  But I don't see them as addresses
> either, since addresses are identifiers[1].
>
> IMO, the best way to think of this is with the EPR as a 2-tuple with an
> identifier and some contextual state, in exactly the same way we think
> of http URIs and cookies.  So, I believe that an EPR is an identifier
> iff it contains no contextual state, i.e. no RefParams.
>
>> One remaining question is whether EPR (as addresses) should be URIs  
>> but I
>> think this should be opened as a separate issue.
>
> I disagree.  I think it's part and parcel.  But no biggie, as long as  
> it
> gets its day in court. 8-)
>
> So unfortunately, I'm -1 on the proposal.  And I'd consider writing up
> my own proposal, but it involves removing RefProps (to provide a single
> identifying data element), and I don't see that flying just yet.  But
> we'll see where DavidB and Hugo get on that front ...
>
>  [1]  
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/ 
> 0588.html
>
> Mark.
> -- 
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
>