W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2001

RE: Proposed Framework Text for F2F (was RE: TBTF: In-context Framework Intro.)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:11:29 -0800
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D05801E58@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Cc: <Chris.Ferris@sun.com>, <fallside@us.ibm.com>, <gdaniels@macromedia.com>, <highland.m.mountain@intel.com>, <hugo@w3.org>, <jones@research.att.com>, <marc.hadley@sun.com>, <ohurley@iona.com>, <ylafon@w3.org>, <www-archive@w3.org>

Maybe I missed something but I thought the following two paragraphs
should be combined to one:

"The combination of the SOAP extensibility model and the SOAP binding
framework provides some flexibility in the way that particular
featuresand MEPs can be expressed: They can be expressed entirely within
the SOAP envelope (as blocks), outside the envelope (typically in a
manner that is specific to the underlying protocol), or as a combination
of such expressions.

It is up to the communicating nodes to decide how best to express
particular features and MEPs; often when a binding-level implementation
for a particular feature is available, utilizing it when appropriate
will provide for optimized processing."

Futhermore, isn't the ednote addressed at this text and not at the
bottom paragraph? Shouldn't the ednote be place after the text above?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 16:12:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:14 GMT