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

Re: Untargetted blocks (was Re: Must understand mustUnderstand proposal)

From: Marc J. Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 10:37:52 +0100
Message-ID: <3AFA6170.449DF035@sun.com>
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
CC: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, xml-dist-app@w3.org, hugo@w3.org
Doug Davis wrote:
> 
> So "None" headers are meant to be skipped in terms of gathering the list
> of headers to process since its not supposed to contain "primary" data
> but rather "auxiliary" data that is to be used while processing some other
> block in the envelope?  Well, I guess they wouldn't be picked up anyway
> since we're assuming there won't be any actors named "None".
> 
> OK, so, why wouldn't someone place this auxilary data in the header that
> does actually use it or even in the body (if its used by lots of href's) ?
> 
The only reason I can see is to prevent duplication when more than one
header block needs to refer to the "None" header block. As you say,
putting the data in the body is one way to solve this but might not
always be desirable if the block contains meta information that isn't
logically part of the body.

Marc.

--
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Tel: +44 1252 423740
Int: x23740
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2001 05:38:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:01 GMT