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

RE: i0001: EPRs as identifiers (why XML?)

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:09:39 -0800
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A505AEE072@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

To add to DaveO's response, remember the purpose of the sub-address.
It's used in conjunction with the address URI to enable the
infrastructure to deliver the message to its ultimate destination.  It's
designed to work with SOAP, which defines headers for the purpose of
delivering the message to the ultimate SOAP destination.  SOAP headers
are XML.  Thus it is quite natural for RefProps to be XML as well, to
eliminate a translation or binding process from some other form (plain
text?) to XML.  A model that wasn't SOAP-centric perhaps wouldn't get as
much synergy from XML.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:39 AM
> To: David Booth; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: i0001: EPRs as identifiers
> 
> 
> 1. Qnames are good as identifiers, as in "myns:component".  I can see
> having a list of properties and values, with the property names being
> QNames.  Grid, WSDM do this.  There are other xml languages, like
> XQuery, that are emerging that can be used to identify components as
> well.
<snip/>

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Booth [mailto:dbooth@w3.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:30 PM
> > To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > Cc: David Orchard
> > Subject: Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers
> >
> > DaveO,
> >
> > Regarding http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-
> > addressing/2004Nov/0351.html
> >
> > The analysis you gave brings up some very good issues, but I don't
> think
> > it goes far enough to justify the conclusion that WS-Addressing
should
> > include Reference Properties.
> >
> > 1. The example you gave seems to *assume* that XML identification
> > mechanisms are needed in this context:
> >
> >         "Many applications use XML as the
> >         mechanisms for identifying their components."
> >
> > I don't think this is a reasonable assumption, because certainly
> > if you assume that XML identification mechanisms are needed, then
> > XML identification mechanisms will appear to be the easiest way to
> > achieve them.  Rather, I think the question is: *Are* XML
> identification
> > mechanisms needed to identify a Web resource?  If so, why?  What are
> > the use cases that *require* them, where URIs would be inadequate?
<snip/>
Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2004 20:10:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT