W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2001

Re: Finalised Glossary Definitions

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:15:04 +0100
Message-ID: <3AB71F97.AB0C5401@crf.canon.fr>
To: frystyk@microsoft.com
CC: "'Williams Stuart'" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@akamai.com>, "'Mark Jones'" <jones@research.att.com>, "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> [In SOAP]
> Handlers as such do not have names as they are always associated with a
> processor. However, modules have names which is the XML NS URI of that
> module. How a processor finds a handler is an implementation choice but
> it could for example be based on the XML NS URI of the module.
> When we look at the XML NS URIs and the actor URIs we in fact have two
> names in a SOAP message:
>   * The actor URI identifies the "name" of the receiving SOAP processor
>   * The XML NS URI identifies the "type" of the block.
> [...]

Henrik, I had always been thinking of namespaces as a way to avoid
XML-tagname clashes, no more. You are suggesting that XMLP also uses
namespaces to "name" ("type"?)  modules, which I would have done instead
through an additional attribute. From your knowledge, it this particular use
of namespaces suggested by the XML Namespace spec? is it common practice?

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 04:16:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:12 UTC