- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:00:47 -0400
- To: hugo@w3.org
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
Hi again Hugo, I'm not sure why I didn't just point this out in the first place, but there's a fine example of the EPR/URI issue in the submission itself; <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="..." xmlns:fabrikam="..."> <wsa:Address>http://www.fabrikam123.example/acct</wsa:Address> <wsa:ReferenceProperties> <fabrikam:CustomerKey>123456789</fabrikam:CustomerKey> </wsa:ReferenceProperties> <wsa:ReferenceParameters> <fabrikam:ShoppingCart>ABCDEFG</fabrikam:ShoppingCart> </wsa:ReferenceParameters> </wsa:EndpointReference> How is that not a URI like this? http://www.fabrikam123.example/acct/123456789?ShoppingCart=ABCDEFG This seems to me to be a *major* problem with WS-Addressing with respect to Web architecture. Now, arguably, since the spec seems to be ambiguous about whether or not visibility into the reference properties/parameters is required by consumers of the EPR, it may or may not be necessary to peek inside an http EPR URI - which would of course be a violation of URI opacity "good practice"[1]. But worst case, EPRs should use a URI scheme which licenses the kind of peeking that WS-Addressing specifies (even though I don't think WS-Addressing needs to do that, as they could be fully opaque and still do their job as identifiers, since it seems that only the service has to actually process them). [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-webarch-20040705/#uri-opacity Cheers. P.S. I'm on vacation for the next week, and will be unreachable during that time. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Friday, 13 August 2004 14:59:46 UTC