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

[DR 609] Lotus "no" (D) vote on 609

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 20:43:03 -0500
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF69C40E16.78FD206B-ON85256996.00094A9E@lotus.com>
Lotus votes "D" on 609 for the reason signalled in the text itself:

"Discussion: There is a very good discussion currently on the WG private
mailing list about this topic, when this discussion recedes we can
formulate the requirement from the consensus."

It seems better to hold off voting on such proposed requirements until
there is agreement on the formulation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------



----- Forwarded by Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus on 11/12/00 08:41 PM -----
                                                                                                                  
                    Noah                                                                                          
                    Mendelsohn           To:     xml-dist-app@w3.org                                              
                                         cc:                                                                      
                    11/12/00             Subject:     [DR 203] Lotus "no" (D) vote on 203                         
                    08:16 PM                                                                                      
                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                  



The proposed requirement states:

"The XML Protocol will guarantee that RPC messages that encode parameters
and results using the default encoding for the base set of data types will
be valid for any conformant binding of the RPC conventions. "

We should specify what goes on the wire, and should ensure that XP is
suitable for certain purposes.  I don't see how the above proposed req't
can be meaningfully specified and tested.  First of all, I think the term
binding here is used to mean binding to programing langs. and object
systems, which is an inconsistent use of the term wrt the rest of the
specification.  More fundamentally, I think the requirement specifies
characteristics of particular bindings, which are beyond the scope of the
spec.  No matter how good XP is, I can always build a faulty language
binding for it.

I think we can and should just drop this one.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 13 November 2000 08:42:13 GMT

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