- From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 02:22:56 -0400
- To: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> That's good because it gives you the level of flexibility you want. So > let's say the resource URI is just some UUID with no meaning of > reference to anything physical (or even logical). Whoa! There's got to be *some* meaning there. Afterall, it's an identifier, isn't it? >But I can still say a > lot of things about it. I can have some specification about the > capability of that printer. I can reference it from different places in > the directory, whether because I was looking for a PostScript printer, > or some printer on my floor, or a 20ppm+ printer. (You were talking about a URI, and then all of a sudden, the antecedent of "it" became the printer. Did you notice that?) > In the case would it be fair to say that this is nothing than some > common name that correlates multiple service definitions together? > Something like a service set. Are you saying that when you stick certain groups of services together into natural, logical bundles, they take on a sort of meaningful identity, and you'd like to be able to name that so you can refer to it over and over and use it? > > An alternative would be to have some collection element to do that, for > example: > > <serviceSet name="uri"> > <service/> + > </serviceSet> Looks quite interesting..... > > But that would require the serviceSet to be rewritten each time a new > service is added. So I would definitely prefer to see some common name > used in independent service definition that ties them together, assuming > anything I said so far makes any sense ;-) Er, you still have the problem of tying and re-tying in response to changes, so you're no better off. Maybe there's another way.... > I'm going to duck and run for cover, hoping that someone would pick a > different name or better clarify it before we end up swimming in another > trout pond ;-) You may prefer a duck pond. :-) Walden
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2003 02:21:27 UTC