Re: [wss] Re: [wsi_secprofile] Re: [wss] about Hitachi's negative vote

[Ron Monzillo <Ronald.Monzillo@Sun.COM>]

I agree. The fragment id's were an editorial convenience, which seems
to have resulted in a need for a clarification that the fully specified URIs
must be used in the wire forms. It also must be clear what fully qualified
URI's  must be used, since  each document lists (on it's front page) 2 
URI's;
the second of which (in each case) is likely not what we intend
(i.e. http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/documents.php)

Ron

Rich Salz wrote:

>
> This is probably the right thing to say, but WS-I BSP is the wrong 
> place to say it; it must be part of WSS.  BSP could (and should) say 
> the URI's MUST NOT be fragments.
>
>> URI fragments defined in WSS: SOAP Message Security 1.0 are relative 
>> to a base URI of 
>> http://www.docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-soap-message-security-1.0 
>>
>
>
> I think WSS could reasonably claim that this is an editorial 
> clarification and fix it in an errata.
>
>     /r$