- 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