Re: targetResource wording

At 08:46 PM 6/19/2003 -0400, Mark Baker wrote:
> >From Sanjiva and Mike, I understood that the [targetResource] attribute 
> identified a "chunk of software" (my words),

Some of the earlier postings may have used language or examples that gave 
that impression, but it's incorrect.  The resource it identifies *could* be 
a chunk of software, but it's entirely up to the (application-defined) 
semantics of those particular WSDL descriptions.  WSDL 1.2 has nothing to 
say about whether that resource is or is not a chunk of software.  And in 
the printer example, it probably would *not* be.

>Where it gets really confusing for me is when words like "resource" and
>"manipulation" are used, as you do there, because that suggests that
>we're talking about the actual resource(s?) which are manipulated at
>runtime behind the service.  So rather than "a chunk of software in
>the printer", I get the impression that you're saying that the URI
>identifies "the printer",

Yes, in the printer example it would probably represent "the printer" -- 
not a "chunk of software".

> > Regarding the name "targetResource", u does identify a resource, so the
> > "Resource" part of the name definitely is appropriate.
>
>I strongly disagree.  By that measure, everything which accepts a URI
>as an argument should be called "resource".

I think what you're saying here is that just because URI u exists, that 
does not magically cause a corresponding resource r to exist.  That is 
correct.  However, the "targetResource='u'" is *asserting* that such a 
resource exists.  The assertion could be false, but that's what it is 
asserting.  It is analogous to the fact that a WSDL document is *asserting* 
that a corresponding service exists.  It might not, but that's what the 
WSDL document is asserting.


-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273

Received on Friday, 20 June 2003 12:54:05 UTC