W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Hierarchy etc.

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:45:25 -0500
Message-Id: <200203051745.MAA32141@tux.w3.org>
To: stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Cc: www-xkms@w3.org
On Tuesday 05 March 2002 12:21, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Without hardly any schmea expertise at all to back me up, I
> strongly prefer the former (flat).
> Question: is there any implementation benefit to using
> abstract types? If not, I think they're just not worth
> it.

From a conceptual point of view, it helps present how the two structures 
are related, and how they differ, we've done a similar thing in XML 
Encryption with the EncryptedType which EncryptedData and EncryptedKey 
derive from. Not a biggie regardless though.

Of course, I'd like there to be one request and it should be the nature of 
the query that determines what it gets back.


Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature/
W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:45:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:38 UTC