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 18:30:36 +0200 (CEST)
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108021829430.12311-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Doug,
 I don't think we could remove "root" from section 5 because in
general you can have multiple serialization roots and using
"start" for marking these would be a hack.

                            Jacek Kopecky

                            Idoox
                            http://www.idoox.com/




On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Doug Davis wrote:

 > ok- #1 is a good reason.  8-)
 > If we do go with "start" we can remove "root" right?
 > -Dug
 >
 >
 > Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>@w3.org on 08/02/2001 11:42:18 AM
 >
 > Sent by:  xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
 >
 >
 > To:   Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
 > cc:   <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
 > Subject:  Re: Proposed resolution: issues 78, 16
 >
 >
 >
 >  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 12:30:39 GMT

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