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

Re: Finalised Glossary Definitions

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 16:21:26 +0100
Message-ID: <3AB77575.8155E6FA@crf.canon.fr>
To: Mark Jones <jones@research.att.com>
CC: frystyk@microsoft.com, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Mark Jones wrote:

>         Mark, I am wondering why (1) would have to know "about the semantics of a block" to do
>         any sort of dispatching. After all, a Web browser does not know anything about the
>         semantics of a particular MIME document, and is nevertheless capable of firing up the
>         appropriate plugin. Why would block dispatching be different?
>         Jean-Jacques.
> Some blocks will indeed represent declarative info.  Other blocks,
> including RPC blocks, are best seen as encoding some kind of intended
> semantics (order a book from Amazon, etc.).

In my view of the world, the RPC Handler would deal with the RPC-related semantics  ("oh yes, this is an RPC
block, let's call the appropriate function"), whilst the function itself would take care of the book-related
semantics ("let's order this book from Amazon"). But I guess I see choosing the RPC Handler in the first place
as purely syntactic (i.e. string matching on actorURI or blockTag).

>  The processor determines
> a handler based on the block tag.  My point was just that a processor,
> right out of the box, doesn't know anything about such mappings.  It
> is only when a specific module is added to the processor, that it gets
> parameterized with this mapping.  It is the module that inherently
> knows about the mapping.

We will probably need to settle on a shared understanding of what a module is... sometime soon!  :)

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 10:22:29 UTC

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