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

RE: Removal (Time for XMail?)

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:59:54 -0400
Message-Id: <200009291656.MAA23469@hesketh.net>
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
At 08:50 AM 9/29/00 -0700, David Orchard wrote:
>The problem of using 1 syntax to contain instances of that same syntax is
>occurring in a few places XML.  The issues surround the data model for the
>"xmlns" quasi-attribute are one example.  When is it an attribute and when
>not?  The same occurs for special elements, say an <xml:include /> element.
>I'm reminded of Godel and issues around circular reference.

I have to admit that I've been wondering lately if the SMTP approach, with
each message as a sequential stream of information, still makes sense.
Maybe sending a couple of streams - an initial (likely XML) description of
what's coming, followed by retrievals to get that information by the
recipient using keys provided in the description.

Effectively, it'd be headers first, then content as a separate message or
set of messages.  The recipient would have a lot more control over what
they got, we wouldn't be trying to stuff everything into an XML document,
and maybe we could finally get past some of SMTP's legacy headaches.

(Yes, I'm aware that this would create many new headaches.  Still, it seems
worth putting out for consideration.)

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
Received on Friday, 29 September 2000 12:56:40 GMT

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