[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsn] [Namespace URIs] Proposal to split the existing namespaces
Thus quoth Fred Carter (~ 11-May-04 3:20 PM ~)... > Thus quoth Vambenepe, William N (~ 11-May-04 2:39 PM ~)... > >> Actually, "we cannot use this where a URI is expected" is too strong a >> sentence. But it poses the risk of creating unnecessary hardship and in >> any case it doesn't improve "resolvability" in the absence of rules to >> handle content identifiers for XSD and WSDL documents. So I don't see >> any value for us going there. > > > No particular disagreement. If using the web worked, fine. If not, > that's OK as well -- as noted, just a thought. Having the ability to > have embedded links was the value. > > I know/knew the fragment id's weren't really part of the URI, but they > are often used that way. Indeed there have been specific proposals for > interpretations in things like WS-PolicyAttachments, etc., for how such > links are to be interpretted, ways to refer to a port within a service > within a wsdl file, etc. Albeit not quite "standard," but convention > rules in many of these cases. I just wanted to explore the possibilities. (Oops -- went and looked & it wasn't in ws-policyattachments. But the point remains -- was anything linkable/resolvable possible...) > > That said, it's fine the way it is... > >> >> William >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Vambenepe, William N Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 2:33 PM >>> To: fred.carter@amberpoint.com; wsn@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [wsn] [Namespace URIs] Proposal to split the existing >>> namespaces >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Fred, >>> >>> Fragment identifiers are not part of the URI. They are appended to it. >>> The "#" character is not allowed in a URI. As a result >>> http://example.com/hello#world is not a URI. It is the concatenation of >>> a URI and the "world" content identifier. How to handle the content >>> identifier is defined differently based on the type of the document at >>> the URI. We are all familiar with how it is handled when the document is >>> HTML. I am not aware of any specification describing how to handle it >>> for a XSD or WSDL document. >>> >>> In any case, we cannot use this where a URI is expected. >>> >>> See RFC2396 section 4.1 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> William >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Fred Carter [mailto:fred.carter@amberpoint.com] Sent: Tuesday, >>>> May 11, 2004 1:11 PM >>>> To: Steve Graham >>>> Cc: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: Re: [wsn] [Namespace URIs] Proposal to split the existing >>>> namespaces >>>> >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> I think the only concern I had was that we link things to WSN. If >>>> I'm understanding your intent correctly, that's amongst the changes >>>> in version 2 of the proposed draft. So that seems fine. >>>> >>>> This one is purely a question. I have no strong opinion one way or >>>> the other. Just a thought... Since we're going for resolvability of >>>> URI's, might it make sense to have things like BaseAction URI's >>>> resolve to their sections in the schema? We appear to be close, in >>>> that (say, for subscribe) we are using the schema location with the >>>> action name appended >>>> >>>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/2004/05/WS-BaseNotification/Subscribe >>>> >>>> I don't know if it would be possible to do something like >>> >>> >>> change the >>> >>>> "/Subscribe" to a "#Subscribe". It's probably overkill, and, as I >>>> said, I don't know who xlink/xptr/anchors work in schemas (or even >>>> if...). >>>> >>>> Anyway, just a thought in the spirit of 'resolvability'. >>>> >>>> /fred >>>> >>>> Thus quoth Steve Graham (~ 11-May-04 12:59 PM ~)... >>>> >>>> >>>>> *Folks:* >>>>> *In [1] I proposed a mapping from the namespace URI >>>> >>>> >>>> convention used in >>>> >>>>> version 1.1 of WS-notification specs to one based on the >>> >>> >>> OASIS file >>> >>>>> naming and related URI namespace conventions.* >>>>> >>>>> *The submitted version of WS-Notification used a single URI >>>> >>>> >>>> namespace >>>> >>>>> per specification for both the XSD and WSDL. Given that we >>>> >>>> >>>> are trying >>>> >>>>> to adopt a direct mapping from URI to URL for our XSD and >>> >>> >>> WSDL, we >>> >>>>> should change this pattern to having separate URI >>>> >>>> >>>> namespaces for the XSD >>>> >>>>> and WSDL.* >>>>> >>>>> *Does anyone object to adopting this change in namespace >>>> >>>> >>>> URIs for the >>>> >>>>> 0.1 draft of the OASIS work on WS-Notification?* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> *[1**]*_http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsn/downl >>>> oad.php/6710/Proposed%20WS-Notification%20URIs.2.doc_ >>>> >>>>> sgg >>>>> ++++++++ >>>>> Steve Graham >>>>> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444) >>>>> STSM, On Demand Architecture >>>>> Member, IBM Academy of Technology >>>>> <Soli Deo Gloria/> >>>>> ++++++++ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Fred Carter / AmberPoint, Inc. >>>> >>> >>> mailto:fred.carter@amberpoint.com >>> tel:+1.510.433.6525 fax:+1.510.663.6301 >>> >> >> > > -- Fred Carter / AmberPoint, Inc. mailto:fred.carter@amberpoint.com tel:+1.510.433.6525 fax:+1.510.663.6301
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]