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 15:17:19 -0400
Message-Id: <200009291914.PAA32220@hesketh.net>
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
At 02:04 PM 9/29/00 -0400, David E. Cleary wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On
>> Behalf Of Simon St.Laurent
>>
>> I suspect the harder sell on this would be this shift from "I'm
>> sending you
>> this big chunk o' mail" to "I'm sending this menu of items.  Which would
>> you like to get?"
>
>It sounds like you are talking application semantics. Nothing stops you
>today from using SOAP and sending a URI reference as a parameter that an
>application can choose to do something with. However, I do not see how the
>protocol semantics will be able to properly pick and choose what to
>retrieve.

Of course I'm talking about application semantics!  We're talking about a
particular application, so that should follow naturally.

While using SOAP and sending a URI reference might be tantalizing to some,
I'm not convinced that a generic solution like SOAP is a great answer to a
specific and extremely large-scale problem like email.

I'd like to think that XML might be a good answer for some parts of this
question, and would like to see a (even) more distributed answer than SMTP
in its current form, but I'm not looking to SOAP as an answer.

If this were to move forward, I'd like to see it combine XML with an
email-oriented distributed protocol.

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 15:14:01 GMT

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