W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2005

[Bug 1244] [XSLT 2.0] question about result-document/@href

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 15:25:44 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1DRXNA-0008Sh-If@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1244





------- Additional Comments From lbzwischenbrugger@fh-stpoelten.ac.at  2005-04-29 15:25 -------
Hi again

> The WG has taken the view in the past that passing data to a web service and
> getting a response is no different from calling a Java method and getting a
> response. 

<enthusiasm>

XML and HTTP messaging is different from rmi, rpc, or low level udp/tcp
communication or Java.
XSLT is good in managing XML based data. But xslt can't handle biniary data.
XML based messaging ins sometimes difficult to do in languages like PHP. 

XSLT can procede XML based Data from webserices, xml-rpc, (rss already works)

http is build-in in every XSLT Engine I know.

</enthusiasm>



It is implemetation dependend weater the "document-result" makes a connection
to the internet. 

---snip---
<xsl:result-document href="http://api.google.com/search/beta2"
format="toc-format" validation="strict">
---snap---

The http potocoll WILL respond to the POST/PUT request.
In the draft I can't find the answer where this response goes (if the http
functionality is implemented and allowed).
It also isn't clear if this request will be a POST or PUT (if not the same) action.


If the result-document functionality is used simple to write files to the
filesystem 
or to stdout there will not be much response. 
But http will give an answer to requestes.

If you write something about this answer to the draft I would be very happy.
(if it is a good answer ;-)
Please don't send this answer to nirvana - it is useful.

Bernhard Zwischenbrugger
Received on Friday, 29 April 2005 15:26:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:37 GMT