Re: Now that the train has left the station ...

My recollection was that this was covered, at least tangentally, at  
the F2F; to stretch your metaphor, someone wearing black might not be  
a student at that institution, but if they wear something that's  
black and has the crest of the university, they probably are.  
Similarly, while the presence of the Action *property* doesn't mean  
much, the header we define has a more restricted semantic; if you  
don't want people to infer that you have addressing engaged, you can  
still populate the property with another mechanism (e.g., a header  
with a different QName).

Cheers,


On 11/10/2005, at 3:57 PM, David Hull wrote:

>
> ... I think I finally put my finger on the other reason I don't like
> about keying "WSA is engaged" off of [action] instead of any wsa:  
> header.
>
> As I understand it, the reasoning is that, since [action] is required
> and non-defaulting (and, as it happens, the only such), its presence
> indicates that the intent was to to engage WSA.  But the  
> implication is
> backwards.  Intending to engage WSA implies wsa:Action (as it  
> happens),
> but not vice versa.  The students at the Aveda institute downstairs of
> our office are evidently required to wear all-black, but wearing
> all-black does not imply that one is studying cosmetology (one might
> instead be playing rugby for New Zealand, or one might just like  
> black).
>
> Be that as it may, I accept that the issue is settled.
>
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems

________________________________________________________________________________
BEAWorld 2005: coming to a city near you.  Everything you need for SOA and enterprise infrastructure success.

 
Register now at http://www.bea.com/4beaworld

 
London 11-12 Oct| Paris13-14 Oct| Prague18-19 Oct |Tokyo 25-26 Oct| Beijing 7-8 Dec

Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 19:08:34 UTC