- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:59:51 -0500
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 04:40:02PM -0800, David Orchard wrote: > After some discussion, I think that what I've been hearing is a bit more of > a refinement. I think I could live with an entire GED always being > serialized, and also have some bindings serialize a part of the GED into an > alternate encoding, such as a URI. In the case of something like a > brokerage transaction, the transaction # could go into the URI but would > need to go into the envelope. Why would it need to go in the URI? You seem to be describing a POST (in the case of HTTP) example, where IMO, the URI should identify the message destination, not be dependent upon what's being communicated. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 20:58:07 UTC