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

Re: SOAP actor model

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:53:14 +0100
Message-ID: <3AB8B24A.49E611C3@crf.canon.fr>
To: Mark Jones <jones@research.att.com>
CC: mnot@akamai.com, frystyk@microsoft.com, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Mark Jones wrote:

> 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.

Mark, overloading means different things to different people. What do you mean by
overloading here? (I'm not aware of overloading as a standard XML concept.)

> I'd be willing to go this route instead of "overloading the actor",
> although I actually don't view it as overloading.  My point was that
> the actor would be a designation of the "the kind of processor
> that should handle this block" by either having a binding/handler
> in the processor's environment or not.  Currently, the actor is somewhat
> underutilized -- with only special URI's signifying the next processor
> and the last processor.

I agree.

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2001 08:54:18 UTC

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