W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > July 2004

Re: Issue 189 proposals:

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 02:02:34 +0600
Message-ID: <1ede01c4734b$7f693800$2e694109@LANKABOOK>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

"Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org> writes:
> 
> If I have:
> 
>   <data>
>     <a>1</a>
>     <b>2</b>
>     <c>3</c>
>     <d>4</d>
>   </data>
> 
> then the draft as it stands says that:
> - location="{a}/{b}" serializes as "1/2?c=3&d=4"
> - location="{a}/{b}/" serializes as "1/2/?c=3&d=4"
> 
> Now, your proposal is that location="{a}/{b/}" serializes as "1/2",
> and that the rest be serialized as application/xml, i.e.:
> 
>   <data>
>     <c>3</c>
>     <d>4</d>
>   </data>
> 
> Am I right?

I have to say .. this is just too much black art for me. How do you
expect users to distinguish between "{a}/{b/}" and "{a}/{b}/" with
such serious implications?

I know we accepted this, but its not a winner feature IMO.

Sanjiva.
Received on Monday, 26 July 2004 16:03:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:32 GMT