RE: fabrikam?

+1
abbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ewald
> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 2:31 PM
> To: 'Christopher B Ferris'; 'Rich Salz'
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org; public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> Subject: RE: fabrikam?
> 
> 
> 
> Makes sense to me.
> 
> Tim- 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 2:21 PM
> > To: Rich Salz
> > Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org; 
> > public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org; tim@mindreef.com
> > Subject: Re: fabrikam?
> > 
> > I believe that subdomains would be consistent with RFC2606.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Christopher Ferris
> > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
> > phone: +1 508 377 9295
> > 
> > public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 08/15/2005 02:15:46 PM:
> > 
> > > 
> > > > I think the limitation of example.com is that in a lot of
> > cases you
> > want to
> > > > show URIs from multiple entities participating in an 
> interchange.
> > > > From
> > a
> > > > pedagogical perspective, I think it's easier to
> > understand examples
> > that use
> > > > other domain names.
> > > 
> > > This is a good point.  I wonder if sub-domains
> > (customer.example.com,
> > > home-office.example.com, etc) works?
> > > 
> > >    /r$
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
> > > DataPower Technology                           
> > http://www.datapower.com
> > > XS40 XML Security Gateway   
> > http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Received on Monday, 15 August 2005 18:47:14 UTC