W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2001

Re: mid-course correction on abstract model for module processing

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 14:21:46 +0200
Message-ID: <3ACB11DA.747C6FB@crf.canon.fr>
To: Mark Jones <jones@research.att.com>
CC: hugo@w3.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Mark,

Catching up on this one...

R802 may indeed lead to some representation that physically partitions the message,
and header/body is one such representation; but then it only helps the final receiver
"process XMLP blocks intended for them without processing the entire message", *not*
the intermediaries.

And I agree with you, "what if header blocks reference body blocks"? A solution that
comes to mind is to order blocks, so that blocks targeted at the same... thing...
(waiting for a conscencus here) are contiguous. But then the order for one
intermediary may not be optimal for another intermediary. (And besides, I think there
is a conscencus that the ordering of blocks is semantically important, and so it may
not be changed lightly!)

Jean-Jacques.

Mark Jones wrote:

> Hugo Hass wrote:
>         The whole point about this body/header difference was that carrying
>         out the "body" semantics did not require a different element and that
>         it could be done with a single element and attributes.
>
>         I still believe that, as Jean-Jacques suggested, it makes more sense
>         to use only one element.
>
> I like the elegance of a single construct (block), perhaps nested
> inside a grouping elements (Blocks??).  Henrik points out that there
> is a requirement, however, R802, that may lead to some representation
> that physically partitions the message:
>
>   R802 -- XMLP must also enable processing intermediaries to locate
>           and process XMLP blocks intended for them without processing the
>           entire message.
>
> I'm not sure what representations might satisfy this.  Also, I am not
> sure how this requirement squares with the possibility of forward
> references using the id/href mechanism.  What if header blocks
> reference body blocks?
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2001 08:22:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:00 GMT