W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > February 2007

RE: WSDL 2.0 URI templates

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:17:46 -0800
To: "'Joe Gregorio'" <joe@bitworking.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8A9D6C1BD4CA44A4AB56BAEAA445294E@DELLICIOUS>

Well, we'll see.  We hope it will "just work" in the most common cases.  The
extra burden on implementers seems modest given what we already need to do
to populate the template, and the end result seems worthwhile (allowing
URI-valued parameters without too many needless % characters.

But I'm more interested in whether you have advice on whether we ended up in
the right place (or at least not in the wrong place).

Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joe.gregorio@gmail.com [mailto:joe.gregorio@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Joe Gregorio
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:49 AM
> To: Jonathan Marsh
> Cc: uri@w3.org
> Subject: Re: WSDL 2.0 URI templates
> 
> On 2/23/07, Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com> wrote:
> 
> First off, thanks for the excellent information, you can't over
> estimate the importance of hands on experience.
> 
> I do have a question about:
> 
> > 2)      Escaping is somewhat involved, and where our latest issues have
> > arisen.  We are also trying to strike a balance between usefulness and
> > trying to prevent users from hanging themselves in all cases.  To date
> the
> > encoding changes slightly based on the context:
> 
> So you don't see having different rules for encoding based on
> the component as too burdensome or confusing?
> 
>    Thanks,
>    -joe
> 
> --
> Joe Gregorio        http://bitworking.org
Received on Wednesday, 28 February 2007 23:18:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:10 UTC