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

Re: [AMG]: Glossary terms: XP Processor, XP Sender and XP Receiver.

From: Scott Isaacson <SISAACSON@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:37:52 -0700
Message-Id: <sa792e76.040@prv-mail20.provo.novell.com>
To: <mark.baker@canada.sun.com>, <ksankar@cisco.com>, <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <marting@develop.com>, <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <ohurley@iona.com>, <frystyk@microsoft.com>, <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>, <Lynne.Thompson@unisys.com>, <nick.smilonich@unisys.com>, <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3c.org>
Stuart,

> I think that the narrative of the glossary and Figure 4 present an
> inconsistent view. I prefer the implied by Fig 4 and would like to see the
> narrative adjusted to be more consistent with Fig 4.

I agree with your preference.  I too like the implications of Figure 4 more than the
implications of the text and feel that the text should be changed accordingly. This sovles the issues I brought up in one of my first emails on the abstract model.

To be even more clear in our layering, in the abtract model we need to show which components handle which XP Message elements.  For example, if we agree that the XP Processor is "above the XP layer" (at the application layer. maps tp XP Client in the abstract model) and XP Senders and Receivers are "in the XP layer" (maps to XP-Layer-Entity in the abstract model) then what are their relationships to the other items in the Glossary in section 6 like XP Message, XP Envelope, XP Header, XP Body, and XP Blocks.  Who handles what?

I propose:

1) Since XP Processors are above the XP layer, they handle either the entired XP Body or at least one XP Block in the XP Body.  
2) Since XP Senders and Recievers are within the XP layer they handle the entire XP Envelopes and the entire XP Header or at least one or more XP Blocks (possibly XP Faults) within XP Header.


Scott
Scott A. Isaacson
801.861.7366
sisaacson@novell.com 


>>> "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com> 02/01/01 04:14AM >>>
Folks,

I'm trying to reconcile the terms, "XP Client" and "XP Layer entity" that I
used in the strawman [2], with terms and diagrams for "XP Processor", "XP
sender" and "XP receiver" from the requirements document [1].

I think that the narrative of the glossary and Figure 4 present an
inconsistent view. I prefer the implied by Fig 4 and would like to see the
narrative adjusted to be more consistent with Fig 4.

Figure 4 from [1] suggests a match between "XP processor" and "XP client"
which feels comfortable to me. It makes the "XP Processor" an 'application'
entity that handles application processing of an XP message once it has been
received and forms application messages to be send. 

The "XP sender" and "XP receiver" of figure 4 are then the entities that
actually deal with the rules of the protocol and the transfer of the message
over the 'wire' through the use of underlying protocols. That makes "XP
sender" and "XP receiver" from [1] match with "XP layer entity" from [2] and
really specialise it to the role of sending or receiving an XP message.

However, the text of the glosssary entries, suggests completely the
converse:

<extract>
XP processor 
An XP Processor processes an XP message according to the formal set of
conventions defined by the XML Protocol and generates an XP fault if the
conventions are not followed. Insufficient or wrong data carried in an XP
block can cause an XP processor to generate a fault (see also XP receiver
and XP sender) 

XP sender 
An application that can generate an XP message and perform an XP binding to
a specific protocol for the purpose of transmitting the message. 

XP receiver 
An application that can accept an incoming XP message transmitted using some
XP binding, extract the message from the XP binding and pass the message to
an XP processor. 
</extract>

The text yields match between "XP layer entity" and "XP processor" and
places "XP sender" and "XP receiver" as applications which for me matches up
with my notion of an "XP Client".

Thoughts, Comments?

Stuart

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xp-reqs-20001219/ 
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/01/15-abstract-model/ 
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2001 11:38:39 GMT

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