I took an action during the last concall [1] to update the proposal [2] for issue i020, subissue (c) [3]. The revised proposal is below. The old proposal [2] was sent out when we had a notion of a physical address and logical address -- this has since been removed. The old proposal had three parts: The 1st part said that if the WSDL-related metadata was included then the EPR was specific to the selected portType/service -- this I think is still relevant. The 2nd and 3rd parts contained the physical and logical address distinction and are therefore not relevant any more. I would like to suggest that we retain only part 1 of the proposal (I have made changes to reflect the changes to the abstract WSDL binding properties) and remove part 2 and part 3. Pl. note that Paco (who was involved in the original proposal) has not reviewed this new proposal. Proposal: When the EPR minter includes a [selected port type], and/or [service-port] then the EPR is considered to be specific to the [selected port type] and/or [service-port] HTH. -Anish -- [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/5/08/29-ws-addr-minutes.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Jan/0109 [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i020Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 19:36:15 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:09 GMT