RE: endpoint definition

This conversation seems slightly bizarre.  Using the word resource in
the definition of endpoint makes sense.  The only "identifying" part of
the endpoint has the type anyURI, thus the word Resource is already part
of the type.  If issue #1 had been closed some other way, then maybe I
could see a different term used.

If people don't like the words "resource" and "dereference" in the web
context, they really should have commented on the architecture of the
www.  

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:30 PM
> To: Jim Webber
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: endpoint definition
> 
> 
> (time for a new subject, I think)
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 02:45:44AM -0000, Jim Webber wrote:
> >
> > > "A Web service endpoint is a (referenceable) resource to
> > > which Web service messages can be addressed. Endpoint
> > > references convey the information needed to address a Web
> > > service endpoint."
> >
> > -1
> >
> > That's very sneaky Mark :-)
> 
> Me, sneaky? 8-)
> 
> But seriously, my proposal was just to remove redundant information,
not
> to change the meaning.  Saying "entity, processor, or resource" is
akin
> to saying "red, blue, or a colour"; might as well just say "a colour".
> 
> > "A Web service endpoint is a (referenceable) software agent to which
Web
> > service messages can be addressed. Endpoint references convey the
> > information needed to address a Web service endpoint."
> 
> That would be a significant restriction over what's permitted by the
> current definition, and would prevent a whole lot of Web-style
> interactions.  -1
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

Received on Thursday, 24 February 2005 04:31:49 UTC