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

Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: 21 Oct 2002 10:01:34 +0200
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>, Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <1035187295.18023.4.camel@krava>

Jean-Jacques,

I think the table without the 'Assumed' and 'mU' columns was better
because rows with Assumed=No are all the same and rows with mU=Yes are
again all the same. So the original table seems to be more concise and
expressing the same information, therefore better.

Anyway, by not having Assumed=No row for the Relay role are you
suggesting the interpretation that relay must be assumed by everybody?

Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation
                   http://www.systinet.com/


On Fri, 2002-10-18 at 17:06, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> 
> Since this seem to be found of interest, here's a further update 
> with "mustUnderstand" added.
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> |------------------------|----------------------------------|
> |            Role        |           Header                 |
> |              |         | Understood |     |               |
> | Name         | Assumed |& Processed | mU  | Forwarded     |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | n/a | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            |     | reinserted    |
> | relay        | Yes     |------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | Yes | No, fault     |
> |              |         | No         |-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | No  | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | n/a | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            |     | reinserted    |
> | next         | Yes     |------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | Yes | No, fault     |
> |              |         | No         |-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | No  | No            |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | n/a | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            |     | reinserted    |
> |              | Yes     |------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | Yes | No, fault     |
> |              |         | No         |-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | No  | No            |
> | user-defined |---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> |              | No      | n/a        | n/a | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | n/a | n/a           |
> | ultimateRec. | Yes     |------------|-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | Yes | n/a, fault    |
> |              |         | No         |-----|---------------|
> |              |         |            | No  | n/a           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> | none         | No      | n/a        | n/a | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|-----|---------------|
> 
Received on Monday, 21 October 2002 04:01:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:11 GMT