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

Re: Proposed resolution: issues 78, 16

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST)
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108021737210.12311-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Doug,
 There are couple of reasons for "start":
 1) with "root", you have to parse the whole body to see if the
attribute was not used in case it really was not, while with
"start" you either know it's the first element (if "start"'s not
present) or you only have to parse up to the element pointed to
by "start",
 2) "root" belongs to encodings and if we move it to the core,
the multiref notion would be moved as well (because "root" is for
use with multirefs) and we would practically mandate a particular
way of referencing data inside the payload,
 3) as has been pointed out a few times, "start" has more uses,
like e.g. it could point to the first header to be processed.
 Kind regards

                            Jacek Kopecky

                            Idoox
                            http://www.idoox.com/




On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Doug Davis wrote:

 > Perhaps someone could explain something to me.
 > The proposal is for a "start" attribute that
 > refers to the top-most element in the body.  Right
 > now SOAP has the notion of a "root" attribute
 > (granted its in the encoding section, but it can
 > be moved).  How is the "start" attribute any
 > better than the "root" attribute?  In both cases
 > we need to read/parse at least the first XML element
 > of each to determine either if the "name" matches
 > the one on the "start" attribute, or if the
 > "root" attribute is there.  I don't see the
 > benefit of "start". Am I missing something?
 > -Dug
 >
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2001 11:43:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT