- From: Wilson, Kirk D <Kirk.Wilson@ca.com>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 21:29:39 -0500
- To: "Smith, Virginia (HP Software)" <virginia.smith@hp.com>, <public-sml@w3.org>
Apologies; I'm going to be on an airplane for this Thurs conf. call. However, I would like to comment on the following passage from the minutes: ***** Noah: TAG is sensitive to new ways to reference things on the web that are not URIs. John: the content of the SML URI reference scheme *is* a URI Noah suggests that SML WG send note to TAG describing this. ACTION: Working group to email TAG explaining that SML uses URIs to refer to web docs [opened by John Arwe on 2008-01-30] ***** The ACTION doesn't quite reflect what I thought the issue was that Noah was raising. I don't think the TAG would have any problem with SML using URIs to refer to web docs, the issue that I believe Noah was raising was that were opening the possibility of having references on the Web that were NOT URIs. As I recall, Noah also mentioned a second potential problem we might encounter, namely, one regarding the use of EPR as SML references. (Since EPRs use URIs in the wsa:address, I don't think his preceding point applies to EPRs.) The problem with EPRs was that "they" (I'm not sure who "they" were) promised to use EPRs only for "transitory things, like cookies." (Unfortunately, a lot of the standard writers apparently weren't in on that promise and have stipulated the use of EPRs for services that provide documents.) Kirk Wilson, Ph.D. Research Staff Member, CA Labs 603 823-7146 (preferred) Cell: 603 991-8873 -----Original Message----- From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Smith, Virginia (HP Software) Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:10 AM To: public-sml@w3.org Subject: [w3c sml][minutes] 2008-01-23 SML F2F in Orlando Minutes attached. -- ginny
Received on Monday, 4 February 2008 02:29:40 UTC