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