- From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:51:32 +0100
- To: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
* Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com> [2005-01-03 10:38-0500] > I am almost ok with the text you propose; I would like to keep an explicit > reference to the possibility of embedded metadata becoming stale. So I > would like to propose that the last two paragraphs in your proposed text be > amended as follows: > > However, the metadata embedded in each of the EPRs MAY differ, as the > metadata carried by an EPR is not necessarily a complete statement of the > metadata pertaining to the endpoint. Moreover, while embedded metadata is > necessarily valid at the time the EPR is initially created it may become > stale at a later point in time. > > To deal with conflicts between the embedded metadata of two EPRs, or > between embedded metadata and metadata obtained from a different source, or > to ascertain the current validity of embedded metadata, mechanisms that are > outside of the scope of this specification, such as EPR life cycle > information [link to section 2.4 Endpoint Reference Lifecycle] or retrieval > of metadata from an authoritative source, SHOULD be used. That's fine with me. Cheers, Hugo -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Monday, 10 January 2005 17:51:33 UTC