RE: XP Service URIs

> 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