W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2003

Re: targetResource wording

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 20:51:07 +0600
Message-ID: <078401c3334d$8ee708f0$72545ecb@lankabook2>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

"Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org> writes:
> So why not have the spec mint a URI which identifies a resource
> which represents *every* other resource (i.e. every resource
> everywhere, that exists, has existed, or will exist)?  Then
> you won't need targetResource at all, as it can be assumed
> that its value will always be this URI.

Huh? Either I don't understand what you said or you have
totally misunderstood the purpose of @targetResource.

The purpose of @targetResource is to allow one to record the
fact that services s1 and s2 which have the same @targetResource
in fact are about the same resource. That means that they have
some relationship between them. The nature of the relationship
itself is not indicated, but most likely the @interface of
s1 and that of s2 indicate what they do (to each other or to 
whoever cares about the fact that they are related).

Having the spec create a single URI for all services to use
clearly does not serve that purpose.

Received on Sunday, 15 June 2003 10:50:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:42 UTC