- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:36:25 -0400
- To: 'Tom Jordahl' <tomj@macromedia.com>, 'Hugo Haas' <hugo@w3.org>, 'David Orchard' <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
+1 to option 2 Asir -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 10:03 AM To: 'Hugo Haas'; 'David Orchard' Cc: 'www-ws-desc@w3.org' Subject: RE: LC45: {http location} sometimes a template, sometimes not I also think that option 2 (do nothing, improve text) seems like the way to go on this. -- Tom Jordahl Macromedia Server Development -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hugo Haas Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 4:34 AM To: David Orchard Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: Re: LC45: {http location} sometimes a template, sometimes not * David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com> [2004-09-30 01:01-0700] > I don't quite get how 1a is crisper. Seems like 2) is the way to go for > me. I had the feeling that 1a) was crisper because it was always {http location}'s value combined with {address}'s which generated the Request URI, without messing around with {http location}'s potential template syntax before doing so. It was {http location template} which was the template. Maybe it's not that much crisper indeed, so 2) looks better. -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:36:42 UTC