W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > December 2004

RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI

From: Srinivas, Davanum M <Davanum.Srinivas@ca.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 23:05:47 -0500
Message-ID: <87527035FDD42A428221FA578D4A9A5B08812112@usilms24.ca.com>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Rich Salz" <rsalz@datapower.com>, "Harris Reynolds" <hreynolds@webmethods.com>
Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

I kind of agree...get rid of all three or keep all three :)

-- dims 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Martin Gudgin
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:57 PM
To: Rich Salz; Harris Reynolds
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI


Given that we have deal with "QNames in Content" anyway, what's the
motivation for moving from QName to URI for the @RelationshipType?

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rich Salz
> Sent: 02 December 2004 19:49
> To: Harris Reynolds
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: Re: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> 
> 
> I totally agree that we should not replace qname's with URI's when 
> they come from the outside (e.g WSDL), but that we should use URI's 
> for our own stuff.
> 	/r$
> 
> -- 
> Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
> DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
> XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
> XML Security Overview      
> http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 04:05:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:00 GMT