W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

Re: First Draft of summary of TAG issue abstractComponentRefs-37

From: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:52:32 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: <www-tag@w3.org>

At 12:59 AM 2003-04-10, dorchard@bea wrote:
>4. Use full XPointer.  The sample URI is
>- re-use XPointer syntax, which is a rec
>- Compliant with URI specification & frag-identifiers
>- Type is apparent
>- extensions are identifiable
>- complex syntax
>- requires XPointer processor
>- uris aren't guaranteed to be unique.

Note that WS-I Basic Profile (draft) [1] R3010 references the UDDI Best 
Practice [1] for using WSDL in a UDDI Registry [2], which states

"In this version, the format of the fragment identifier used in the 
overviewURL to refer to a specific wsdl:binding in a WSDL document ... has 
been changed to conform to the XPointer xpointer() scheme.  This change is 
not compatible with the fragment identifiers specified in Version 1.07 of 
this document. Publishers are urged to change to the new form of fragment 

A new draft [3] UDDI Technical Note (TN) for WSDL is out for review 
[4].  It allows the xpointer approach, but also defines other UDDI 
structures (categoryBags, etc.), which can be used instead of fragment 
identifiers to refer to specific parts of a WSDL document.

[4] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec/200303/msg00068.html

Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 16:52:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:37 UTC