RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI

Correlate between a request and a response done with 2 asych messages.  

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Harris Reynolds
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:48 AM
> To: 'Martin Gudgin'; Rich Salz
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> 
> 
> This is related, but slightly off topic.  Why do we need the
relationship
> type attribute in the first place?  What use case does it satisfy?
> 
> 
> Harris Reynolds
> webMethods, Inc.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Martin
Gudgin
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:57 PM
> To: Rich Salz; Harris Reynolds
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> 
> 
> Given that we have deal with "QNames in Content" anyway, what's the
> motivation for moving from QName to URI for the @RelationshipType?
> 
> Gudge
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rich Salz
> > Sent: 02 December 2004 19:49
> > To: Harris Reynolds
> > Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: i037: Replace QName's with anyURI
> >
> >
> > I totally agree that we should not replace qname's with URI's
> > when they
> > come from the outside (e.g WSDL), but that we should use
> > URI's for our own
> > stuff.
> > 	/r$
> >
> > --
> > Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
> > DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
> > XS40 XML Security Gateway
http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
> > XML Security Overview
> > http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
> >
> >
> >

Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 18:08:40 UTC