[ogsa-wg] FW: Issue #1 proposed resolution
Djaoui, A (Abdeslem)
A.Djaoui at rl.ac.uk
Fri Jan 21 03:46:34 CST 2005
Just in case you have not seen this, It appears RefProps will be removed
from EPR's. Something we should discuss.
Abdeslem
/////////////////
-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-request at w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request at w3.org]On Behalf Of Ugo Corda
Sent: 20 January 2005 01:33
To: Mark Little; Mark Baker
Cc: public-ws-addressing at w3.org
Subject: RE: Issue #1 proposed resolution
Mark and Mark,
It looks like RefProps are gone as of yesterday: see
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i001 .
Ugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request at w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request at w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Little
> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 5:26 PM
> To: Mark Baker
> Cc: public-ws-addressing at w3.org
> Subject: Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution
>
>
>
> Mark, I have a distinct dislike for RefProps/RefParams, as
> you're aware. However, putting my pragmatic hat on for a
> moment, I don't see them vanishing in this release of the
> specification. That doesn't prevent us from debating their
> utility (or lack thereof), but I suspect it would be better
> to take it off this mailing list if we're to try to maintain
> the timeline that was proposed by the submitters and agreed
> upon by the members of the group. Who knows, there may be a
> change in a subsequent release?
>
> Also, I'm not sure why you moved my text around, but it could
> change the context of what was originally intended. I didn't
> mention the word "identification" at all in the proposed text I said.
>
> Mark.
>
> ----
> Mark Little,
> Chief Architect,
> Arjuna Technologies Ltd.
>
> www.arjuna.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Baker" <distobj at acm.org>
> To: "Mark Little" <mark.little at arjuna.com>
> Cc: <public-ws-addressing at w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 12:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Issue #1 proposed resolution
>
>
> > Mark,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 10:41:53PM -0000, Mark Little wrote:
> > > I think the pragmatic view on RefProps/RefParams has to
> be that they
> will
> > > stay (rightly or wrongly, there are implementations and
> > > specifications
> out
> > > there that now rely on them).
> >
> > This is a new spec we're working on, no? Those implementations can
> > continue to depend upon whatever version of the spec they currently
> > depend upon. Nothing we do here can break them, AFAICT.
> >
> > > I agree that the term "identifier" can be
> > > contentious. However, so can the term "state". How about just
> > > calling it/them "additional information that referencing
> > > specifications [aka
> using
> > > specifications] or implementations need in order to ultimately
> > > address
> the
> > > endpoint service"?
> >
> > >From my POV, there appears to be agreement to removing the part of
> > >the
> > spec that talks about using RefProps for identification.
> Adding "in
> > order to ultimately address" back in would be akin to undoing that
> > change. The point of the change, as I see it, is to get
> identifying
> > information out of the RefPs, and into the URI, and I
> consider that an
> > enormous improvement over the WS-A submission.
> >
> > > That way we're not saying *what* goes in there, only
> > > *why*.
> >
> > IMO, identification is a "what".
> >
> > Mark.
> > --
> > Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.
> http://www.markbaker.ca
> >
>
>
>
More information about the ogsa-wg
mailing list