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

RE: i034: computing default Action value for WSDL 2.0

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:52:28 -0500 (EST)
To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
cc: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0411172043570.31259-100000@smtp.datapower.com>

> remember if this was intentional or not, but the effect is that WSDL
> target namespaces are a subset of XML namespaces and thus the issue of
> "#" appearing in a target namespace doesn't come up.

So you mean you can't have a WSDL namespace that ends with "#"?  (I'm not
sure I understood you.)  If so, can I go find out where/why?  (I know many
WSDL WG folks are on this list, so feel free to send me a note off-list.)

> Whether using # in a namespace is clever or not I'll pass on.  You can
> probably tell that I'm a reformed fragment enthusiast.

Nah, it's cool.  Anytime you need a URI within your namespace, you just
have to come up with a fragment-style name.  As long as the "base" URI
is dereferencable, then all URIs within that namespace are, too.  That's
often a lot easier to maintain than adding new "pathname" components.
I'd argue that if the URI is really "part of" the namespace, it's
architectually correct, too.  And in the "cute hack" category, it gives
you an easy qname<->nsuri-localname mapping.

	/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 Thursday, 18 November 2004 01:52:30 GMT

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