[uddi-spec] FW: UDDI's UUIDs issue

[Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>]

More comments from W3C...

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Hugo Haas
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 11:21 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: UDDI's UUIDs issue



* Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net> [2002-12-04 08:25-0500]
> So Joel, are you saying that there is no reason to create a uddi: scheme?
>
> I don't think that Karsten's explanation really addresses the core issue.
> The tModelKey is supposed to be a URI. The current tModelKey is a UUID.
> Although it's a unique identifier, it doesn't give you the ability to GET
it
> using simply the ID.

Karsten Januszewski's showed that there is a way to get a tModel using
the existing http: scheme. Therefore, there is no need for a uddi:
scheme.

> I think Paul has proposed that we use an http:// URI rather than invent a
> new uddi: scheme to identify a tModel. The point I was making is that you
> cannot do an HTTP GET on http://[tmodelname] to retrieve the tModel
details.
> You have to compose a fairly complicated composed URL (e.g.,
> http://[server_name]/modelDetails.aspx/[uuid]) as decribed by Karsten
below.
>
> If we create a uddi: scheme, I can see the UDDI TC developing a mechanism
> that would allow you to perform a GET on a uddi: URL and retrieve the
> resource.

Creating a new URI scheme is very costly and should only be a last
resort solution. Creating a uddi: scheme as a level of indirection to
do an HTTP GET doesn't seem like a last resort solution to me.

Regards,

Hugo

--
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/