- From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 22:03:13 -0800
- To: "XML Protocol Comments" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Presumably the the phrase 'Any protocol binding to HTTP must respect the semantics of HTTP and should demonstrate that it can interoperate with existing HTTP applications.' is stating that the binding must demonstrate interop rather than XP itself? Also, I don't understand the phrase 'a subset of HTTP that is compatible with pre-XP Internet browser technology.' Having a normative binding to HTTP is a 'good thing'. I think it would also be good to have other bindings defined, perhaps non-normatively in the base XP spec, perhaps normatively in other specs layered on top of XP. I think the main problem with having only a *single* normative binding is that people will assume ( wrongly ) that XP is tied to that protocol. Gudge
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2000 01:04:49 UTC