> It does seem loose, and also along with that 2787 in the assembly spec > the WS binding spec says: > > 247 This specification does not mandate any particular way to > determine the URI for a web services binding on an SCA service. > > so it seems we can do what ever we like. > > I guess I was asking if we're happy with how it works right now so we > can try and make it work as consistently and as simply as possible > across bindings. Using just the componentName (as 1.x does) seems > simplest for simple cases, but it doesn't seem great to have an > existing endpoint change if the component is updated to have an > additional service or binding added. > > ...ant >
Well it would be a straightforward change to make the uri always include service name and possibly binding name if that's what we want to do. Binding name is a bit problematic because it defaults to the service name which leads to odd URIs. Personally I think the least variability be embed in our various algorithms the simpler the implementation and the simpler the user experience. Simon
