- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: 17 Jan 2002 20:20:24 -0500
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, ietf-xml-mime@imc.org
On Thu, 2002-01-17 at 19:08, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 07:31:10PM -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-01-17 at 18:18, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > > I think the mistake is in assigning such messages a type that implies > > > it should be handled by a generic XML processor. There is no such thing, > > > > No such thing? There are all kinds of processing gidgets and storage > > systems that work on XML generically. You might want to choose more > > precise language. > > There are all types of procesing gadgets and storage systems that work on > bytes generically. If that was a useful distinction at the message level > then there wouldn't have been any need for media types. Sure. But I hope you've noticed that XML is perhaps slightly more than bytes - and perhaps even a "useful distinction at the message level". If not, I'm not sure I really want to send my nouns to your limited set of verbs. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2002 19:16:17 UTC