- From: Robert Waldstein <wald@library.ho.lucent.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:28:24 -0400
- To: www-zig@w3.org
> Rob Bull wrote: > > Now, in the follow up ONE-2 project, we have re-visited explain again, and > > (I guess to your dissapointment) invented "another work round" we call > > explain-lite - its a piece of XML passed on Init. > > > > However, this has been created for real reasons - > > - it is considered that creating an XML approach is far more in line with > > 21st century technology, rather than the overhead of the explain PDUs, > > - it covers the _real_ things people want to know about a server, and not > > the additional baggage that you can get with explain; > > ... > > Kevin wrote: > I agree with every point. Just to weigh in (gee, thought I had switched to being a lurker) I strongly disagree with the 2 points above (agreed with the rest). explain PDUs (actually PDUs/BER in general) have very little overhead. I have always found that impressive. everything in explain were real things that someone argued for needing for their implementation. The things you aren't interested in you don't send and - in theory - your server then won't support those clients or functions. I actually would be curious what was considered "additional baggage"; don't even think there was much OSI support that I recall. bob
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2000 15:28:27 UTC