- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 07 Feb 2003 10:06:38 +0000
- To: "Paul Cotton" <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, <www-tag@w3.org>
"Paul Cotton" <pcotton@microsoft.com> writes:
> >> As far as I know, SOAP hasn't expressed a requirement for anything.
>
> Looking back at the history of this issue [1], message [2] from David
> Fallside officially describes the XMLP Working Group's rationale for
> their use of a subset of XML. And Mike Champion sent a message [3]
> which gives the official W3C Web Services Architecture WG position
> supporting the existence of this subset.
>
> In addition your own message [4], gave an excellent rationale for why
> SOAP used such a subset.
>
> All of these inputs were important in convincing me as a TAG member to
> support the TAG's recommendation [4] on this issue. I invite
> participants in this thread to review these earlier messages.
I have reviewed all these messages, and remain unclear as to the TAG's
motivation for commending a _solution_ (in the form of a subset) to
the Core WG, rather than asking them to address a (putative)
_requirement_. I'd welcome clarification from you or any other TAG
member on this point
Or do you feel that the kind of approach I suggested (a new
conformance level, as opposed to a subset of the language) would
actually be in-scope for Core in response to the TAG's recommendation?
Thanks,
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Friday, 7 February 2003 05:06:31 UTC