W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2000

RE: Proposed revised wording of 6.3 preamble

From: Anderson, William L <WAnderson@crt.xerox.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 12:55:12 -0500
Message-ID: <BF85F885643CD21188230008C756293502E1E956@crte128-2.wrc.xerox.com>
To: "'Martin Gudgin'" <marting@develop.com>, Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Noah and Martin, is this a useful picture of the communication piece?

	XP Processor | XP Communicator <------ XP Msg -------> XP
Communicator | XP Processor

I know we need words but the end points are identical aren't they? The role
of sender or receiver depends on the message direction. And I don't intend
to expose a specific design or implementation, but we are building on
existing well-known and shared understandings of network protocols.

Maybe the preamble could say (trying to avoid "in front" and "behind"):

Proposed new wording

The XML Protocol message path model is defined in terms of XP senders and XP
receivers that send and receive XP messages respectively. An XP Sender
generates a message conforming to the XML Protocol rules. An XP Receiver
receives and processes the message according to the rules of the XML
Protocol.


(Of course one problem here is that sending and receiving is defined using
the terms send and receive. Maybe need to say senders formulate and transmit
and receivers accept and process?)

comments?

Bill Anderson

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:marting@develop.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2000 12:11 PM
> To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed revised wording of 6.3 preamble
> 
> 
> Yeah, I'm not perfectly happy with those parts. I was trying 
> to find some
> symmetry for senders with what was already there for 
> receivers. I'm totally
> open to suggestions in this area and will spend some time 
> over the holidays
> trying to formulate some better prose.
> 
> Gudge
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
> To: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>
> Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2000 2:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposed revised wording of 6.3 preamble
> 
> 
> > Thanks for doing this.  On the whole this looks good, but I 
> must say that
> > I find the terms "in front of" and "behind each" to be 
> somewhat ambiguous
> > as to what really happens first (though you can easily 
> guess) and perhaps
> > too informal.  Thanks again.
> >
> > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> > Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 
> 1-617-693-4036
> > Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 
> 1-617-693-8676
> > One Rogers Street
> > Cambridge, MA 02142
> > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>
> > Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
> > 12/21/00 11:15 PM
> >
> >
> >         To:     "XML Protocol Comments" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> >         cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus)
> >         Subject:        Proposed revised wording of 6.3 preamble
> >
> > Existing wording
> >
> > The XML Protocol message path model is defined in terms of 
> XP senders and
> > XP
> > receivers who can generate and accept XP messages 
> respectively. Behind
> > each
> > XP receiver is an XP processor that processes the message 
> according to the
> > rules of the XML Protocol.
> >
> >
> > Proposed new wording
> >
> > The XML Protocol message path model is defined in terms of 
> XP senders and
> > receivers which send and receive XP messages respectively. 
> In front of
> > each
> > XP sender is an XP processor which generates a message 
> according to the
> > rules of the XML protocol. Behind each XP receiver is an XP 
> processor that
> > processes the message according to the rules of the XML Protocol.
> >
> >
> > Gudge
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 12:57:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:58 GMT