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

Re: targetResource wording

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:16:20 -0400
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF06865D26.31867136-ON85256D46.0053B608-85256D46.0053E43D@us.ibm.com>


Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624

www-ws-desc-request@w3.org wrote on 06/15/2003 10:51:07 AM:

> "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 11:16:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:25 GMT