- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 20:51:07 +0600
- 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. Sanjiva.
Received on Sunday, 15 June 2003 10:50:57 UTC