This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Agile Buzz
by James Robertson.
Original Post: Re: An example of WS-Addressing silliness
Feed Title: Michael Lucas-Smith
Feed URL: http://www.michaellucassmith.com/site.atom
Feed Description: Smalltalk and my misinterpretations of life
Just recently W3 has approached WS-Addressing. Mark Baker is on the ball, pointing out that this is a waste of a spec, where URI's can do just as good a job. It appears as though they've taken what a URI actually is (ie: its object model) and defined that as XML. Then thrown in namespaces to extend what a URI is capable of containing in terms of information.
What is amazing is that they managed to get this URI modelling wrong! They don't have tags for the components of the address, only the parameters.
Tell me.. why is it that CSS isn't defined in XML? Or XPath isn't defined in XML? It's very simple really. It's impracticable to have every descriptive language defined in XML. So why would we want to write URI's in XML? Well, honestly, we wouldn't - URI's work, are standard and are well supported all around.
Previous Topic
