- From: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:47:13 -0500
- To: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
David,
My point is precisely that: the way things are described drives the
assumptions people make about what they ARE. And if you say that EPRs are
identifiers people are going to take EPRs and compare them for identity,
precisely because that is what identifiers are for.
If the suggestion is that we describe EPRs are identifiers when we know
they are not identifiers but addresses, and then let people cope with the
fact that we could not get our act together, that does not sound like a
very promising plan to me.
Paco
David Booth
<dbooth@w3.org> To: Francisco Curbera/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
12/07/2004 04:28 Subject: Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers - alternative proposal
AM
Paco,
The issue is not about how Reference Properties are described. The
issue is about how they are *used*. Calling them "addresses" instead of
"identifiers" changes nothing.
--
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2004 13:47:47 UTC