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

Re: An analysis of mustUnderstand and related issues

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:20:08 +0200
Message-ID: <3AFFDB88.B1A7D77C@crf.canon.fr>
To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org

Thanks for taking the time to put this together; this looks great! A
few small comments below:

>  It is an error if any header referred to from dependsOn is not
> labeled either "mustHappen" or "hasHappened".

So we would not be able to express "headerA OR headerB" ? (That's
fine; just wondering.)

> Prior to processing any header carrying a "dependsOn" attribute, a
> check is made to ensure that each of the referenced headers
> "hasHappened"

I think you need an additional bullet that says that a given actor
processes headers according to the dependency graph (Yes, I know, this
is the basis of your "dependsOn" proposal, but I think went missing
from the list of bullets.).

> It is possible to impose dependencies on multiple headers destined
> for the same actor.  It is also possible to impose explicit
> dependencies on headers, including the body, destined for the
> anonymous actor.

And I guess it is possible to impose dependencies on multiple headers
destined at different actors? (Unless I am mistaken, this is, I think,
the subjet of your later example.)

Received on Monday, 14 May 2001 09:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:13 UTC