W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > March 2005

RE: Why is [destination] defined as an IRI?

From: Rogers, Tony <Tony.Rogers@ca.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:26:47 +1100
Message-ID: <7997F38251504E43B38435DAF917887F40C396@ausyms23.ca.com>
To: Andreas Bjärlestam (HF/EAB) <andreas.bjarlestam@ericsson.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Just testing my own understanding, but I think this is because [source endpoint], [reply endpoint], and [fault endpoint] each contain a destination IRI of their own.
 
The destination is not the same kind of thing as the other three.
 
Putting it another way, the [destination]'s EPR is the one containing all of these pieces.
 
Please, someone correct me if I've misunderstood.
 
Tony Rogers

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of Andreas Bjärlestam (HF/EAB) 
	Sent: Thu 10-Mar-05 17:01 
	To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Why is [destination] defined as an IRI?
	
	


	Why is the [destination] defined as an IRI while the [source endpoint], [reply endpoint] and [fault endpoint] are defined as endpoint references? Why can they not be treated equally? Is there a fundamental difference?
	
	.Andreas
	
	
	
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2005 06:27:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:04 GMT