Re: [DR 309] Vague?

Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote:

> The proposed requirement states:
>
> "In cases where there is prior knowledge of the specific interactions that
> will arise between given XP implementations, it should be possible to
> create implementations supporting these interactions using only a minimal
> amount of XML infrastructure."
>
> I cannot tell what this really means to say.

What I read this to say is that as many parameters of the envelope as possible
should be defined as optional, so that two parties who have a prior agreement on
a given parameter's value should not have to explicitly include the value in the
envelope just to be compliant with the protocol.

Anyway, that's what I read it to say; assuming I understood it correctly, I
suppose it could stand re-wording, but I think it's reasonably clear.

--Ray

--
Ray Denenberg
Library of Congress
rden@loc.gov
202-707-5795