W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Back to Requirements (was RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some T houghts ..."])

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:53:45 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203052053.PAA06376@markbaker.ca>
To: chris.ferris@sun.com (Christopher Ferris)
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Mark,
> I used the term "XML Infoset" which is not the same as
> XML1.0 anglebrackets and so does not constrain the "what"
> which amounts to some mechanism by which an XML Infoset
> is "expressed" (serialized).

Hmm, well, what kind of formats are expressible in the Infoset?  Can GIF
be expressed, for example?  I don't know, but was assuming it couldn't.
If it can, then I think your proposed definition is a fine one.

My response to Dave where I brought up the Infoset was meant to suggest
that being less restrictive was good, but still not as good as not
restricting I/O formats at all.

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 15:49:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:54 UTC