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

RE: SOAP actor model

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:12:45 -0800
To: "'Mark Jones'" <jones@research.att.com>, <mnot@akamai.com>
Cc: <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D0297CA73@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

>I spoke to Henrik today, and he thinks it is better to 
>overload the block tag.  Some blocks would be purely 
>declarative -- this is a vcard, for example.  Other 
>(actionable) blocks would have more processing-oriented tags 
>that the processor would bind to a handler. These tags would 
>either surround a declarative block, or possibly point to a 
>declarative block, particularly if the block needed to be 
>processed in multiple ways.

The role of a block can even change depending on the semantics of other
blocks pointing to it. This is a different way of saying that how one
uses some data (a block) often is a function of the user rather than of
the data.

Looking at the example in the SOAP DSig W3C Note [1], it shows an
example of one block signing another block. The block being signed has
processing associated with it - it is requesting a stock price. To the
signing block, however, it is just a bag of angle brackets.

Figuring out how modules relate processing wise of course gets us into
the other discussion that we have had on ordering but even though these
discussions are related I think it would be nice to keep them separate.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-dsig/#ex
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 20:13:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:12 UTC