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

Re: [DR702] Evolution

From: Oisín Hurley <ohurley@iona.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 11:55:21 -0000
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002f01c0547b$172e1320$9f03020a@psychobilly>
>I would prefer to see this phrased in terms of the XP application
>determining whether a given message conforms to a version of XP that the
>application recognises rather than in terms of comparison of twos messages.
>I don't think evolution is defined in terms of messages being compatible
>with each other but in terms of messages conforming to a given version of
>XP.

Hi Martin,
Hopefully the new wording that leaves out the 'comparison' is more
acceptable
to you.

>I'm also having some difficulty understanding what the last sentence means.
>How can an XP envelope *mandate* that an application be extended?

Sorry, wording a bit raggy there. What this is meant to mean is that
the it may be mandatory for an XP processor to process certain extensions
or fail.

 --oh
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 06:55:28 GMT

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