- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:38:25 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2aboftzr2.fsf_-_@nwalsh.com>
/ "James Fuller" <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say: | On Dec 12, 2007 9:29 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: |> Jim, |> |> Are you satisified with this response? | | +1, | | ta, Jim Fuller | |> / Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> was heard to say: |> | / James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say: |> | | 5.13 p:document |> | | |> | | 'It is a dynamic error (err:XD0011) if the document referenced by a |> | | p:document element does not exist, cannot be accessed, or is not a |> | | well-formed XML document.' |> | | |> | | should err:XD0011 be expanded to include |> | | |> | | large documents or time out situations ? |> | |> | If you mean that a large document might cause an out-of-memory error |> | or something, I don't think we need to address that. That's a bug in |> | the implementation :-) |> | |> | How is a time out different from any other kind of inaccessibility? |> | |> | | should we make a difference between 'cannot be accessed' and 'do not |> | | have access rights' ? |> | |> | I don't think so. The security-conscious will probably tell us that |> | doing so would be revealing information that might be better kept |> | secret. |> | |> | Be seeing you, |> | norm |> | |> | -- |> | Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The Future is something which everyone |> | http://nwalsh.com/ | reaches at the rate of sixty minutes an |> | | hour, whatever he does, whoever he |> | | is.--C. S. Lewis |> |> Be seeing you, |> norm |> |> -- |> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything should be made as simple as |> http://nwalsh.com/ | possible, but no simpler. |> Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Time wounds all heels. http://nwalsh.com/ |
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 20:38:34 UTC