- From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 14:29:13 -0800
- To: jones@research.att.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
At 03:20 PM 2/3/2003 -0500, Mark Jones wrote: >R29. [This requirement engendered a lot of discussion and has > some significant ramifications for the Abstract Attachment > Specification and for the basic conception of the SOAP > message infoset.] > > (a) A message with all its parts, however separated physically, must > be representable as a single infoset. > > (b) A message with all its parts, however separated physically, must > be describable as a single XML element in an XML schema. I don't know what is motivating this requirement but let me just point out that this attachment specification is needed precisely to complement XML, to make up for its intrinsic shortcomings. Specifically, a hierarchical data model with a single root and a brace-matching serialization is a terrible way to send data. We need a layer outside of the braces that is designed to be analyzed incrementally and not top down. The central value proposition of XML, layering syntax out of our code, cannot be applied here because we cannot read the whole package into a parser before processing it. (The side-effect of discussing this requirement--pinning down the definition of terms like "message"--seems like a good thing however.) ______________________________________________________ John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100
Received on Monday, 3 February 2003 17:50:52 UTC