[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsn] www.producer.org
+1 -----Original Message----- From: David Hull [mailto:dmh@tibco.com] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 6:50 AM To: Peter Niblett Cc: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [wsn] www.producer.org +1 Peter Niblett wrote: >As a suggestion, we could adopt the following convention for the ><wsa:address> in all our examples > >http://www.example.com/xxx > >where xxx is the name of the "interface" implemented by the endpoint, > >e.g. > >http://www.example.com/SubscriptionManager >http://www.example.com/NotificationConsumer > >I have put this on the agenda for today's call > > > > > > "Springer, Ian > P." > <ian.springer@hp. To > com> Peter Niblett/UK/IBM@IBMGB, > <wsn@lists.oasis-open.org> > 14/10/2005 23:20 cc > > Subject > RE: [wsn] www.producer.org > > > > > > > > > > >The common practice is to use example.com, example.net, and/or >example.org as described in RFC 2606 [1]. > >[1] http://rfc.net/rfc2606.html > >| -----Original Message----- >| From: peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com [mailto:peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com] >| Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 5:30 PM >| To: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org >| Subject: [wsn] www.producer.org >| >| The non-normative examples in both Base and Brokered >| Notification use supposedly fictional endpoints that start >| www.producer.org. >| >| This address appears to have been registered by an online >| gaming site (maybe this explains some of our Public Review feedback). >| >| I'm inclined to think that it is inappropriate for us to use >| this in our examples. Is anyone aware of a safe address that >| we could use instead? >| > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]