Re: [wsrf] Singleton Resource Pattern

[Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>]

Hi John:
In the case where there is no disambiguation,
then this is a trivial subset of the "singleton resource pattern"
wherein there is no further "decoration" on the wsa:Address part
of the EPR.

It doesn't seem to make sense to me
to separate out this use case from the "singleton resource pattern".
For example, the various xsd:element  definitions that describe EPRs
as component of message response payloads, parameters on message requests
etc. are well served as being typed as wsa:EndpointReferenceTypes.  Help
me understand if there is a benefit to typing these components as:  "wsa:EndpointReferenceType"
or "anyURI".  I would observe that an EPR containing just
a wsa:Address component contains the information necessary, and has little
overhead.  It would be good to isolate requestor from the decision
made by the service provider: 'full implied resource pattern' or 'singleton
resource pattern' or 'no disambiguation at all'.  We can do this by
using EPR.

sgg

++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++

John DeCarlo <jdecarlo@mitre.org> 07/12/2004 11:21 AM

To:        wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org         cc:                 Subject:        Re: [wsrf] Singleton Resource Pattern

Steve,


Thank you for the enlightening description.

My question is about the case where there is no need for disambiguation
(at least the client need not send any information int he message for 
this purpose).

Is this case:
                
1) a trivial subset of what you described
                
  (e.g., just no need for any additional modifiers in
                
  the address), or
                
2) substantially different
                
   (e.g., removes the need for an EPR at all)?

I would appreciate further discussion of this.

Thanks.

-- 

John DeCarlo, The MITRE Corporation, My Views Are My Own
email:      jdecarlo@mitre.org