- From: Srinivas, Davanum M <Davanum.Srinivas@ca.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:32:12 -0500
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Replace PortType in sample with ServiceName since Issue [1] clearly includes ServiceName as something we need to check if we can replace. Look at the EPR as is defined today. <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="..." xmlns:fabrikam="http://bosnewslife.com/"> <wsa:Address>http://www.fabrikam123.com/acct</wsa:Address> <wsa:ServiceName>fabrikam:BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_Services</ wsa:ServiceName> </wsa:EndpointReference> Is this more readable than what's above? <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="..."> <wsa:Address>http://www.fabrikam123.com/acct</wsa:Address> <wsa:ServiceName>urn:BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_Services:http:/ /bosnewslife.com/</wsa:ServiceName> </wsa:EndpointReference> [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i037 -----Original Message----- From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 4:18 PM To: Srinivas, Davanum M; Hugo Haas; public-ws-addressing@w3.org Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI It is probably out of scope for WS-A to define a WSDL 1.1 or WSDL 2.0 portType/Interface to URI mapping. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Srinivas, Davanum M [mailto:Davanum.Srinivas@ca.com] > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:11 PM > To: David Orchard; Hugo Haas; public-ws-addressing@w3.org > Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI > > Let's me illustrate better readability with Harris' example [1] > > Look at the EPR as is defined today. > <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="..." > xmlns:fabrikam="http://bosnewslife.com/"> > <wsa:Address>http://www.fabrikam123.com/acct</wsa:Address> > > <wsa:PortType>fabrikam:BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_ServicesSoap< > /wsa:PortType> > </wsa:EndpointReference> > > Is this more readable than what's above? > <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="..."> > <wsa:Address>http://www.fabrikam123.com/acct</wsa:Address> > > <wsa:PortType>urn:BosNewsLife_x0020_Information_x0020_ServicesSoap:http: > //bosnewslife.com/</wsa:PortType> > </wsa:EndpointReference> > > When you look at the PortType, you can see both the port type and the > namespace, it's right there. In the current you need to scan the xml > document to look for xmlns:fabrikam and what then figure out what > namespace that it is mapped to.... > > [1] http://bosnewslife.com/webservices/bnl_services.asmx?wsdl > > Thanks, > dims > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 2:58 PM > To: Hugo Haas; public-ws-addressing@w3.org > Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI > > > There's been no proof that the problems that the TAG finding talks about > are relevant to WS-A. I generally refuse to do things "because somebody > smart said so", and *especially* when the smart people didn't outlaw > QNames and noted many cases where they were useful. I remember when I > mentioned to TimBL that OASIS WS-Security had moved to URIs from QNames, > and he sighed and said "there goes readability". > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-addressing- > > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hugo Haas > > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 11:35 AM > > To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org > > Subject: Re: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI > > > > * David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com> [2004-12-03 06:56-0800] > > > In general, +1. It seems to me that any rationale for moving part > of > > > WSA QNames to URIs would be to provide some kind of benefit. I'm > not > > > strongly against moving relationshipType to URIs, but I'd like a > > > stronger reason than "because". > > > > I think that the motivation is not just "because", but the TAG finding > > > on QNames that I'm sure you're familiar with: > > > > | In so far as the identification mechanism of the Web is the URI and > > | QNames are not URIs, it is a mistake to use a QName for > identification > > | when a URI would serve. > > > > As this is internal to Addressing, it seems like a simple and natural > > change to do. > > > > So I quite like Harris's proposal. > > > > Regards, > > > > Hugo > > > > -- > > Hugo Haas - W3C > > mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/ > >
Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 21:32:14 UTC