RE: Proposed Edits to "Framework" spec for header/body distinctio n.

Hi Noah,

Yeap... I guess the penny has dropped! I'm ok with it, I may even come to
like it! On one level it emphasises the opaqueness of whatever is in the
body, which feels a bit more like a traditional protocol oriented
header/body distinction.

Thanks,

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah Mendelsohn [mailto:Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com]
> Sent: 04 December 2001 15:08
> To: skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> Cc: xml-dist-app
> Subject: RE: Proposed Edits to "Framework" spec for header/body
> distinctio n.
> 
> 
> 
> Stuart Williams writes:
> 
> >> I do find it uneven to talk of header
> >> blocks and the SOAP Body.
> 
> I'm not hung up on this either, but I thought the wg specifically asked me
> to get rid of the term body block.  The intention, I think, was to
> emphasize the asymmetry between headers, where blocks have very formal
> standing in the architecture, and the body, for which we now say
> essentially nothing about the substructure or interpretation. 
> If there are multiple children of <body>, we're leaving it completely to 
> the app at the
> ultimate recipient to determine the significance.  That's not true of
> headers, for which we mandate interpretation of each child as a block.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 
> 1-617-693-4036
> Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 12:02:28 UTC