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

Re: Has the semantics for Modules changed?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 16:03:54 -0800
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, Williams Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010317160352.C12140@akamai.com>

Yes; I overlooked the block aspect.

This brings another question to mind - will there ever be a case
where a block is targeted at a node in the request, the node
processes the block during the request, and the response also needs
processing by the node, without targeting?

I can imagine that your challenge/credentials module would be
targeted in both directions. Would there ever be a case where the
response would be implicitly targeted, based on its correlation with
the request?

I think the answer is no, but I want to make sure we can rule
targetting by correlation out.

Cheers,




On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 03:11:46PM -0800, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> 
> >Our current definition of Module says to me "Handler 
> >Specification". I can imagine also cases where a single 
> >document specifies multiple, related Handlers.
> 
> Minor correction - Module says: "Handler(s) and Block(s) specification".
> As an example, I can write a simple authentication module specifying
> 
>   * A block carrying the challenge
>   * A block carrying the credentials
>   * A handler that can parse challenges and generate credentials
>   * A handler that can parse credentials and generate challenges
> 
> This might of course be implemented in a symmetrical manner so that both
> parties can do both but that is an implementation choice.
> 
> Henrik

-- 
Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
Received on Saturday, 17 March 2001 19:04:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:59 GMT