- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:04:56 -0500
- To: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Chris, On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 11:01:20AM -0500, Christopher B Ferris wrote: > Mark, > > Please see Paco's recent missive[1]... the EPR is NOT an identifier, it is > an addressable reference. Well, I don't want to get into that because I disagree with Paco; a reference is an identifier (including the snail mail address written on an envelope). My concern though, was just that I wasn't sure if the WG had reached concensus on one position, which is why I described what I felt a self-descriptive message would require from the POV of some of the different perspectives I've heard on this issue. > The ref props/params *can* be used to provide additional information that > the service provider will use > as it sees fit. One such purpose that has been used by WS-RF has been to > pass keys/identifiers to > resources (implied resource pattern) as ref props, but that is not the > only use of ref props/params. > In the context of the implied resource pattern, the ref props serialized > as SOAP headers can be > considered the equivalent of cookies used to associate a stateful session, > like a shopping cart service > might do. Do you mean reference *parameters*? I thought those were, roughly, the equivalent of cookies in WS-A? The submission seems to back me up on that with its description of properties and parameters; "A reference may contain a number of individual properties that are required to identify the entity or resource being conveyed." "A reference may contain a number of individual parameters which are associated with the endpoint to facilitate a particular interaction." -- http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-ws-addressing-20040810/#_Toc77464318 > As an example that is often used, a service might have three levels of > service; silver, gold and platinum. > Each level of service might have a different policy that applies. Hence, I > would use the ref props to > include a <myservice:MembershipLevel> element with the possible values > Silver, Gold, or Platinum. > Is that identity? Nope. Reasonable people could disagree about that and choose to publish different identifiers for each class of service. There are tradeoffs with each approach, of course, but I don't think one can assert that this information is not identifying information since it can clearly be used as such. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 17:03:18 UTC