Re: Comparing IRIs: anon and none

But you'd never get a message sent to "none" since any message  
addressed to an EPR with and [address] of "none" isn't sent. Maybe  
this needs to be generalized to talk about [address] of EPRs instead ?

Marc.

On Mar 13, 2006, at 3:25 PM, Jonathan Marsh wrote:

> Section 3.2.1 states:
>
>
>
> Comparison of [destination] property values is out of scope, other  
> than using simple string comparison to detect whether the value is  
> anonymous, that is, where [destination] has the value "http:// 
> www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous".
>
>
>
> I don’t believe this changed when we added the “none” URI, though  
> it probably should have.  A complete solution would allow both anon  
> and none URIs to be detected through simple string comparison:
>
>
>
> Comparison of [destination] property values is out of scope, other  
> than using simple string comparison to detect whether the value is  
> anonymous, that is, where [destination] has one of the  
> values"http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous" or “http:// 
> www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/none”.
>
>
>
> This is unfortunately probably related to the implementation of a  
> LC issue rather than a CR one.
>
>
>
>  [  Jonathan Marsh  ][  jmarsh@microsoft.com  ][  http:// 
> spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes  ]
>
>
>
>

---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.