RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI

I don't understand this mapping. As far as I know, wsa is NOT a URI
scheme, right?

Gudge 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Srinivas, Davanum M
> Sent: 02 December 2004 19:39
> To: Harris Reynolds; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> 
> 
> How about something similar to what is mentioned in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Aug/0134.html
>  
> For example:
> 	Qname: {http://bosnewslife.com/,
> BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_ServicesSoap} 
> will map to
> 	
> wsa:BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_ServicesSoap:http://bo
> snewslife.
> com/
> 
> Which not too bad to look at or understand...
> 
> Thanks,
> dims
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Harris
> Reynolds
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:15 PM
> To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> 
> 
> 
> This issue [1] centers around replacing QNames in attribute values or
> element content with URIs.
> 
>  
> 
> The use of a QName is used in three places current working draft:
> 
>  
> 
> 1)       wsa:RelatesTo/@RelationshipType information header (attribute
> value)
> 
> 2)       wsa:EndpointReference/wsa:PortType element in an EPR (element
> content)
> 
> 3)       wsa:EndpointReference/wsa:ServiceName element in an EPR
> (element content)
> 
>  
> 
> Mapping the RelationshipType attribute with a URI is relatively
> straightforward.  We could designate a URI like
> http://www.w3.org/2004/10/addressing/relationship/reply for 
> the default
> case of relating a reply to the originating message; in other cases,
> since the type would be anyUri, developers could simply use their own
> URIs.  This is good.
> 
>  
> 
> As DavidO pointed out [2], it is much more complicated to replace the
> QNames representing wsdl:portTypes and wsdl:service with URIs.  This
> will essentially require us to craft a definitive mapping of 
> these WSDL
> QNames to URIs to be used within WS-Addressing.  For this WSDL [3]
> (picked randomly from xmethods.net) one possibility here could be:
> 
>  
> 
> Qname: {http://bosnewslife.com/,
> BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_ServicesSoap} 
> 
>  
> 
> mapping to 
> 
>  
> 
> URI:
> http://bosnewslife.com#BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_Ser
> vicesSoap
> <http://bosnewslife.com/#BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_S
> ervicesSoa
> p> 
> 
>  
> 
> This works in this simple case but could easily be 
> problematic in other
> cases.  Is there a mapping that would work in all cases (i.e. 
> any valid
> WSDL)?
> 
>  
> 
> Despite the TAG finding regarding this kind of issue [4], it 
> seems that
> this is a case where using a QName is much more natural. For 
> now I am +1
> on changing the Relationship type to anyUri and -1 on changing the
> wsdl:portTypes and wsdl:service QNames to URIs.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Harris Reynolds
> 
> webMethods, Inc.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i037
> 
> [2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004N
> ov/0510.ht
> ml
> 
> [3] http://bosnewslife.com/webservices/bnl_services.asmx?wsdl
> 
> [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids.html#sec-archrec
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 03:49:16 UTC