- From: MOREAU Jean-Jacques <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:17:22 +0100
- To: Ray Whitmer <rayw@netscape.com>
- CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Ray Whitmer wrote: > > Or else we should really emphasize the fact that applications using > > custom encodings WILL NOT be XP compliant. > > Why? In a similar situation, CORBA passes objects by value, which are > then mapped locally on either end to a native object or type, that isn't > defined in the CORBA definition. You have to have the value type > definition on both ends for it to work. That was exactly my point: you have to have the definition on both ends! This may be ok for some specialized services, with a limited audience, but IMHO we should discourage general services, the ones that would appeal to a wider audience, to use custom encoding. Otherwise, ALL XP clients would have to be modified to support the particular encoding used by the server. I do not see this as particularly encouraging interoperability, or client stability. So what would be a good way to allow custom encoding, without making it people's primary encoding? Jean-Jacques.
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2000 05:20:36 UTC