- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 07:56:45 -0800
- To: "Henry Lowe" <hlowe@omg.org>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>
- Cc: <rden@loc.gov>, "XML Distributed Applications List" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> Might I suggest that for interoperability with ebXML and > operation with > object oriented systems (e.g., DCOM), both the requestor and > destination > be specified by URIs and they be carried in the header (in case inter- > mediaries are involved, they will know where to find the > target destination). Having destination information be sent as a header makes a lot of sense. > I don't believe a namespace (if I understand what Henrik is > saying) is > suffiecient to invoke a DCOM object (but I admit it's been > years since > I read how DCOM invocations work, so I could well be wrong). Yes, the XML NS identifiers for the <xp headers> do not say what the <xp headers> should be applied to. > In any event, there should be sufficient information for an object > invocation regardless of the transport protocol XP is mapped to. In > ebXML, we looked at this question and a URI does nicely. I agree that a URI indeed does this very nicely! Henrik
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 10:57:31 UTC