[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] [I#114] Should custom roles,modes & window state s use namespacin g?
My main concern was roles (so consider this resolved for me). I do worry about mistaking vendor custom modes for our (future) standard ones. How about using a uri:wsia-wsrp prefix for the standard modes and window states (at least for new ones post 1.0)? -----Original Message----- From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] Sent: 24 October 2002 15:52 To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] [I#114] Should custom roles, modes & window states use namespacin g? Draft v0.8 added this for the name of a role (namely "The name for this role. Preferred form for this names is a URI such that it is definitively namespaced."). I do not think this would be quite so useful for modes and window states as I would expect there to be a much smaller set proposed by vendors and we are likely to want to capture them in a future version so that the names/semantics are standardized. Other thoughts? Gil Tayar <Gil.Tayar@webcol To: "'wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org'" lage.com> <wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org> cc: 10/15/2002 02:27 Subject: [wsrp-wsia] [I#114] Should custom roles, modes & window AM states use namespacin g? Status: Active Topic: meta Class: Minor Technical Raised by: Andre Kramer Date Added: 15-Oct-2002 Section: Interfaces/11.26 Title: Should custom roles, modes & window states use namespacing? Description: Roles have string names which are not required to be URIs. MUST be (namespaced) URIs would be much better in a distributed (mulit-vendor) environment. ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC