W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > August 2002

RE: Problem with resolution of Issue 221

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:03:04 -0600
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E403DED900@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 5:56 PM
> To: Champion, Mike
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Problem with resolution of Issue 221
> * Finally, if the rationale is to allow arbitrary user XML in the
>   body, but then it's somewhere between difficult and impossible
>   anyway.  

Ahh, that's pretty much the clincher for me.

> In short, even a simple capability of carrying PI's introduces
> some complexity into the specifications, into applications and
> APIs, and into conformance testing.

Thanks, that was exactly what I was looking for.

> Having said that, I would also like to point out that the workgroup
> has reached the point that most successful software projects reach,
> where having a stable design and shipping a specification begins to
> grow in importance relative to making every design decision perfectly.

Right.  I was just hoping there was a better rationale, and there does
seem to be.  OK, I'm comfortable with forbidding them entirely, even
if a plausible case can be made in the other direction.
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2002 18:03:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:21 UTC