On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Supun Kamburugamuva <[email protected]>wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:02 PM, indika kumara <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Supun Kamburugamuva 
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:42 PM, indika kumara <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ruwan
>>>>
>>>> When I am just going through [1] ,  I feel that the use of  XML element
>>>> for URI is more suitable than an attribute. The variation is in URI and not
>>>> in address endpoint.
>>>>
>>>>  <address>
>>>>   <uri [ value="" ]  | [
>>>> expression="${protocol}://${host}[:${port}][${path}]"]  />
>>>>  </address>
>>>>
>>>> In the proposed approach I believe the user has to set the properties,
>>> protocol, host, port and path.
>>>
>>> For example to calculate the path user has to say.
>>>
>>> <property name="path" value="path value" scope="synapse"/>.
>>>
>>> And we will parse the above url and replace the ${} with
>>> the calculated values.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Supun..
>>>
>>
>> I did not care that ... I just told that an element is more suitable than
>> an attribute for URI based on an article from an XML expert.
>>
>> I'm +1 for an uri attribute and a uri element :)
>
> May be I'm bit confusing in my above comment. I'm +1 for attribute approach
as well as uri element approach. Either approach is fine with me.

Thanks,
Supun..


> Thanks,
> Supun..
>
>
>> BTW , seems you are correct..
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Indika
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc
> http://wso2.org
> supunk.blogspot.com
>
>
>


-- 
Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc
http://wso2.org
supunk.blogspot.com

Reply via email to