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

RE: XML within XML - includes, transcludes, whatever

From: S. Mike Dierken <mike@knownow.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:07:28 -0800
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ENEILMMLEJBPJPFHPJGGIEEKCGAA.mike@knownow.com>
After reading this, I thought my words might appear confrontational and I
want to make sure that people don't get the wrong impression. I'm just
looking for more discussion about the issues Laird brought up and used very
terse phrases.

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of S. Mike Dierken
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 8:47 AM
> To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: RE: XML within XML - includes, transcludes, whatever
>
>
> > Which raises all sorts of access control and synchronization issues, as
> well
> > as adding protocol overhead which could be substantial for
> small chunks of
> > data.
> What access control and synchronization issues?
> What protocol overhead?
>
> It seems that the 'other file' could be either inside or outside the
> delivered package. If it is inside, then I don't see many access control,
> synchronization or protocol overhead issues. If it is outside,
> then I do see
> that there would be those issues.
>
> I think people in other messages have refered to this as 'pass by
> reference'
> and 'pass by value'. I would imagine a good protocol could support both.
>
> Mike
Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2000 12:06:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:57 GMT