Re: Naming ports vs. naming documents

On 5/3/06, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote:
> I think the supported schemes should be application-defined. I
> certainly want to be able to generate http: scheme URIs with
> components and I will subsequently want to use those URIs in other
> components. Now, it happens, in the cases I have in mind, I will also
> eventually serialize those resources to the URIs in question.

Norm,

Could you describe one of those use cases? If the document ends up
being serialized at the URI in question, somehow this makes more sense
to me. How would that serialization happen? Would it be done by the
pipeline implementation and triggered by the produces="someURI", or
would it be done by a separate step?

Alex
--
Blog (XML, Web apps, Open Source):
http://www.orbeon.com/blog/

Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2006 23:31:50 UTC