- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:23:46 -0800
- To: <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Cc: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, "XMLP Dist App" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
My understanding of 'none' is that anyone can look at it. But no-one can remove it. Specifically targetted blocks ( not 'none' ) can only be looked at by a node playing that role. Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM [mailto:Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM] > Sent: 27 February 2004 21:32 > To: Martin Gudgin > Cc: Jacek Kopecky; XMLP Dist App > Subject: Re: Proposed resolution to issue 455 > > On Feb 26, 2004, at 2:51 PM, Martin Gudgin wrote: > >>> > >>> But surely such a URI would be refer "to the 'none' > header block in > >>> some way" > >>> > >> I was thinking more along the lines of another header block whose > >> semantics specifically enable one or more Representation > headers. You > >> could say that any header that contains a URI that matches > the URI of > >> the Representation header does that implicitly but the > linkage seems > >> rather weak. This would also mean that you couldn't > support the use > >> case in the issue: > >> > >>> "If I want to specifically cause two different > >> representations, of the > >>> same media type for the same resource, to be sent to A and B > >>> respectively, can I safely use multiple representation > headers that > >>> differ in their soap:roles to do this? I would think so." > >> > >> If both Representation header blocks are in scope how > could I target > >> them ? > > > > In that case surely you would just target rep1 at A and rep2 at B. > > > > What's the problem? > > > Two different representations of the same resource would have > the same URI. If a Representation header block is is scope > for URI resolution regardless of whether the node is playing > the role it is targeted at (e.g. if its role was 'none') then > both Representation headers would show up when you try to > resolve. Which do you pick, how do you target ? > > Or are you suggesting that a Representation header block > targeted at 'none' is somehow different (wrt to processing > semantics) to a Representation header block targeted at some > other role the node isn't playing ? > > Marc. > > --- > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> > Web Products, Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems. >
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2004 14:23:55 UTC