- From: Dick Brooks <dick@8760.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:09:54 -0500
- To: <frystyk@microsoft.com>, <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
All the web servers I've used (IIS, Apache, Netscape) provide access to the HTTP headers and the SOAPAction contents are easily accessible to a CGI, ISAPI, NSAPI or servlet program. Once a message broker has the SOAPAction data it can use the information without any further expansion (it's relative to the Host/HTTP POST URI of the message broker). Dick Brooks Group 8760 110 12th Street North Birmingham, AL 35203 dick@8760.com 205-250-8053 Fax: 205-250-8057 http://www.8760.com/ InsideAgent - Empowering e-commerce solutions > -----Original Message----- > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Frystyk > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 4:35 PM > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] question re: namespace hierarchies > > > > Unfortunately this doesn't work because the relative URI has to be > expanded before it can be used for anything and the only thing it can be > expanded against is the request-URI of the HTTP request (in the case of > HTTP) which would mean that I might have something like > > http://henrik.com/some/endpoint/ebxml > > and you might have something like > > http://dickbrooks.com/some/other/endpoint/ebxml > > Which clearly are different and so the ebxml spec can say nothing about > how these identifiers might relate or what they might identify. In other > words, relative URIs are only useful when taken in context (which at > some level is true for all URIs btw.) > > Henrik > > >It appears that "ebXML" qualifies as a "relative-path" URI > >according to the following excerpt from section 5, " Relative > >URI References", in "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): > >Generic Syntax" [1]: >
Received on Friday, 20 April 2001 18:11:42 UTC