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

Re: XMail and XML Protocols (WAS: Removal (Time for XMail?))

From: C Wegrzyn <wegrzyn@garbagedump.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 06:50:58 -0400
Message-ID: <005801c02a03$26ff7c00$9455a8c0@iceberg>
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
In fact the solution offered here - SMTP mail wrapped in SOAP is something
I'm working on right now. It is part of a P2P project that removes the
SMTP/POP/IMAP server from the equation and delivers eMail directly to the
client. Seemed like the right approach to me...why did I need a server to
handle mail? And beside with Carnivoire and the FBI's threat of monitoring
eMail through ISPs it seemed like a nice way to stop them.

Regards,
Chuck Wegrzyn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt Cagle" <cagle@olywa.net>
To: "James Snell" <jsnell@lemoorenet.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: XMail and XML Protocols (WAS: Removal (Time for XMail?))


> The WebDAV extensions are basically XML-based, in that they return XML
> objects upon queries. The biggest issue to be resolved is essentially
> compatibility with existing email protocols -- to that end, I could see
> evolving something like a redundant system as a bridge -- the headers
> contain the same SMTP information they always have had, while a mirror of
> this information as a SOAP entity accompanies this -- the headers for HTTP
> SOAP work this way, at least in the implementations I've seen.
>
> An XML Email solution is, to me, a must have in order to move down the
road
> with distributed computing.  HTTP effectively solves the case of
relatively
> synchronous request/response architectures, but is less than adequate for
> highly asynchronous messaging systems, which is in fact one of the places
> where email is used now. You send your order off as an SMTP protocol
message
> to a mail server which can both send back a notification of receipt and
> place it in a queue. Note that this is not an original idea -- I've seen
it
> floated around for awhile, but generally with the concept that you're
using
> SMTP as the wrapping entity for a SOAP message rather than using a SOAP
> message as the wrapping entity for an SMTP echo. Yet going the latter
route
> essentially means that you can process the XML through any port, so long
as
> its known that it satisfies a SMTP schema.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Snell" <jsnell@lemoorenet.com>
> To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 9:25 PM
> Subject: RE: XMail and XML Protocols (WAS: Removal (Time for XMail?))
>
>
> > I've been thinking about this kind of thing myself.. it actually
wouldn't
> be
> > that hard to map existing SMTP concepts to a protocol such as SOAP or
> > whatever the XML Protocol group comes up with.  In fact, a few months
ago,
> I
> > played around with creating a SOAP to SMTP bridge that ended up being
> pretty
> > simple if not extremely crude.  Anyway, as a long term vision, I can see
> the
> > efforts of the XML Protocol working group leading not only to an
XML-based
> > mail protocol, but also to a completely XML-based replacement to HTTP
and
> > other popular protocols, uniting all of them in a common framework.
Just
> a
> > thought :-).
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Kurt Cagle
> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 10:11 AM
> > To: Michael Brennan
> > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Removal (Time for XMail?)
> >
> >
> > Michael,
> >
> > I'm not so sure that its altogether that far off topic. We have two
> primary
> > mechanisms for data transport across the web -- HTTP, of course, and
SMTP.
> > I've heard all kinds of interesting strategies for bringing XML to HTTP,
> > from WebDAV on down, but it would seem to me that work on a similar
> protocol
> > for upgrading SMTP to an XML basis could provide some powerful
dividends.
> > None of this need be visible to the user -- the SMTP container would
> > essentially be something like a SOAP envelope wrapped around the plain
> text
> > or HTML content. Among other things, it would make it easier to provide
> > consistent mechanisms for handling mailing lists, including unsubscribe
> > information, and it could even make it reasonable to handle such XMail
> > through HTTP ports as readily as through SMTP ones. Just an addled
> thought.
> > Good luck on getting some standardization on mailing lists, though.
> >
> > -- Kurt Cagle
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>
> > To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 11:16 PM
> > Subject: RE: Removal
> >
> >
> > > I don't mean to start a thread about this, but I felt like making a
few
> > > points.
> > >
> > > If you check the mail headers, you'll notice that there are headers
that
> > > tell how to unsubscribe and how to query for help about the list. Of
> > course,
> > > most user-friendly mail programs do not by default display these
> headers.
> > I
> > > believe the intent is that email programs could use the headers
> > > intelligently to provide menus or buttons right within the program for
a
> > > user to unsubscribe or query for help. It would be really nice to see
> > > Microsoft and other vendors support this functionality in their
programs
> > to
> > > make this easy. (I'm not trying to single out Microsoft, here, but
since
> > > they have about 80-90% of the email market, anything they do has a
much
> > > bigger impact than anyone else.) If vendors would jump on board with
> this,
> > I
> > > think things would work much better. Almost every email list I
subscribe
> > to
> > > are providing such headers and are doing so in a consistent manner.
> > >
> > > Some of the lists, instead, add standard footers to every message sent
> to
> > > list subscribers that includes info on how to unsubscribe. You'd think
> > that
> > > would reduce the "unsubscribe" requests to the list, but it doesn't.
> I've
> > > seen messages on such lists that have a one-line "unsubscribe" request
> > > immediately followed by a standard footer that explains how to
properly
> > > unsubscribe (and in some such instances, the user actually followed up
> the
> > > initial request with additional ones). Some people are just plain
> > clueless.
> > >
> > > Ideally, list server programs should be configured with filters that
> > detect
> > > one-line subscribe and unsubscribe instructions, that block the
message
> > from
> > > the list and send a friendly message to the sender directing them to a
> FAQ
> > > on netiquette and how to properly subscribe/unsubscribe from the list.
> Of
> > > course, this filter would have to not only catch "unsubscribe"
requests,
> > but
> > > also "usubscribe" requests, and "unsucbribe" requests, and... well,
you
> > get
> > > the idea.
> > >
> > > I think the real solution is getting the email vendors to have their
> > > programs deal intelligently with the appropriate mail headers. And
while
> > > they are at it, it would be nice if they would make their programs
> > > intelligent enough to not send "Out-of-Office" replies back to email
> > lists.
> > > I know I'm going to get about 5-10 such replies in response to this
> post.
> > >
> > > Sorry about the off-topic post. I'll say no more about it.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Malcolm Dean [mailto:malcolmdean@earthlink.net]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 12:05 PM
> > > > To: Igor Bazdyrev; 'Stasko, Sandra A'
> > > > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Removal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Obviously, joining and leaving mail lists is far more clumsy
> > > > than it should
> > > > be. Everyone sees this kind of message frequently, on all
> > > > kinds of lists.
> > > >
> > > > I have the impression that knowing how to join and leave is
> > > > viewed by our
> > > > nerd/administrators as a badge of courage. How else to
> > > > explain how these
> > > > arcane and backward interfaces appear to be immortal?
> > > >
> > > > Why doesn't some bright spark (perhaps someone you know) get
> > > > to work on
> > > > propagating a truly easy method of leaving a list?
> > > >
> > > > Do the planet a favor. Just think of the time we'd all save ... ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Malcolm Dean
> > > > News Editor, Maximum Linux  (Get a free issue at
www.maximumlinux.com)
> > > > 1015 Gayley Avenue #1229
> > > > Los Angeles CA 90024-3424
> > > > 213-401-2197 fax
> > > > malcolmdean@earthlink.net
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Igor Bazdyrev" <bigor@infolio.com>
> > > > To: "'Stasko, Sandra A'" <sandra.a.stasko@lmco.com>
> > > > Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:05 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: Removal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > The way to unsubscribe explained at http://www.w3.org/Mail/
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Igor Bazdyrev
> > > > > CTO, infolio, inc.
> > > > > bigor@infolio.com
> > > > >
> > > > > PS: my apology for submitting response to the entire
> > > > mailing list but I've
> > > > > got few messages with the same "Removal" subject.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Stasko, Sandra A [mailto:sandra.a.stasko@lmco.com]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 2:04 PM
> > > > > To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > > > > Subject: Removal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Please remove me from this list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
Received on Friday, 29 September 2000 06:51:11 GMT

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