[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Revised proposal for i053
a nit or three below On 03/11/05 15:42, Marc Goodner wrote: > After reviewing our previous proposal for i053 we have come to the > conclusion that the only URI references that need to be updated to IRI > are those that are inherited from WS-Addressing. There are three of > these changes from URI to IRI are all around WS-A Action, two are in > the same paragraph saying that unless there is a value (a IRI) for > Action derived from WS-A rules it is a value defined in WS-RM (a URI). > The other is about using the default value for Fault (a IRI) from WS-A > in Action. > > > > It is not necessary to change the sequence identifier to IRI as we > previously proposed. Therefore we propose the following changes to > satisfy i053, > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i053. > > > > These are the references to URI that should and should not be updated > to IRI in WS-RM [1]: > > 111: keep URI > > 122: IRI > > 123: IRI > > 124: keep URI > > 291: keep URI > > 321: keep URI > following 122 change, should be IRI > 357: keep URI > > 451: keep URI > > 511: keep URI > > 556: keep URI > > 613: keep URI > > 656: keep URI > Why is this the only Identifier handled as an attribute? I do not see an issue about this inconsistency. Is it already identified as an editorial action item to fix? thanx, doug > 695: IRI > > > > Plus of course add the reference to the IRI spec. > > 1 wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-05.pdf > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/15001/wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-05.pdf > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]