W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > February 2006

RE: WSA From

From: Conor P. Cahill <ConCahill@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 08:41:20 -0500
To: "'Mark Little'" <mark.little@jboss.com>, "'Paul Fremantle'" <pzfreo@gmail.com>
Cc: "Cahill, Conor P" <conor.p.cahill@intel.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003201c62cb5$5a9bcae0$0950e984@amr.corp.intel.com>


> If it's optional, why not have it as a full-blown EPR anyway? 
> To be honest, I'd also be happy with something rather than 
> nothing, but I'd be interested in knowing reasons for URI 
> rather than EPR.

EPRs are generally used when I intend to dereference them to]
communicate with another party.   At this point there's no 
processing rules that I would use to make use of expanded
fields in an EPR.

Of course, <From> could have xs:anyAttribute and an
xs:any sub-element definition so that in your particular
environment anything could be added.  Just that the basic
model from From is identifiying the other party -- which
seems to be what I've heard here.

Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 13:41:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:12 UTC