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

Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers - alternative proposal

From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:35:56 -0800
Message-ID: <41B8E15C.1040600@coastin.com>
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org



Tom Rutt wrote:

>
>
>
> David Booth wrote:
>
>> Tom,
>>
>> The reason is that Reference Properties are intended to be used to
>> address things that -- for all intents and purposes -- represent
>> different Web resources.  (I.e., they have different WSDL, metadata,
>> policy, etc.)  
>
What if multiple "things" can be accesed by that web service , and they 
are "identified"
by sending different referenceParms?   Why are reference Parameters not 
part of the "identity" resolution?

>> Reference Parameters *could* be used that way -- just as
>> cookies *could* be used that way -- but they are not *intended* to be
>> used that way, nor are they most often used that way. 
>>
>>  
>>
> If you place a ref parm "<username joe/> in a soap header block where 
> the message body has operation with semantic (what is your
> birthdate) will you get a differenent answer from another exchange 
> with everything else in the message the same but with
> the ref parm value <username joesFather />?
>
> Tom Rutt

Let me clarify my point:   I understand that reference Properties 
distinguish the metadata (i.e., what I like to think of as
web service "type" information) applying to the endpoint, but it seems 
that reference Parameters which distinguish the "instance" of
"thing" behind the web service, which is the subject of communication, 
are also being used to distinguish "identity".


>
>> On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 21:16, Tom Rutt wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> David Booth wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> The question is: What guidance are we giving to the world?
>>>>
>>>> As you point out, we cannot stop people from doing things in ways that
>>>> are anti-Web, nor should we.  For whatever reasons, sometimes someone
>>>> may *need* to address Web resources using something other than a URIs.
>>>>
>>>> But what *guidance* are we giving?  If Reference Properties are 
>>>> kept in
>>>> the spec, we would be *endorsing* a practice that is harmful to the 
>>>> Web
>>>> as a whole.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, if we drop Reference Properties, people who really
>>>> need to address Web resources using non-URIs could still (ab)use
>>>> Reference *Parameters* to accomplish the same result, just as they
>>>> sometimes use cookies to do so today. 
>>>>     
>>>
>>> I do not understand why Reference Parameters would be acceptable but 
>>> Reference Properties are not?
>>>
>>> If either is present, they are used to identify the instance of what 
>>> is being communicated to?
>>>
>>> Tom Rutt
>>> Fujitsu
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> Thus, they would not be prevented
>>>>     
>>>> from doing what they may need to do, but they would be encouraged 
>>>> to do
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> things the Web way.
>>>>     
>>>
>>
>>  
>>
>

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2004 23:39:48 GMT

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