- From: David Ezell <David_E3@Verifone.Com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 15:38:56 -0500
- To: "'wanderson@crt.xerox.com'" <wanderson@crt.xerox.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 11:49:24+05:00 Bill Anderson wrote: >Authentication, encryption, and reliable delivery are already addressed >at the level of protocols like HTTP and SMTP; addressing them as part >of XP would seem like duplication of effort. Sessions and transactions >are complex and we believe should not be addressed by XP for the time >being. From [DR305] "The XML Protocol should provide facilities... to encourage a common approach..." I see no argument with the fact that these facilities are addressed to varying degrees in other (candidate transport) protocols like HTTP and SMTP. The language of the DR is not designed to require the creation of such facilities. However, while an XP application can certainly *use* facilities in the underlying protocol, we should avoid *assuming* the presence of such facilities. What is really at issue, I think, is that XP must have the ability to call out the use of the underlying facilities so that implementors are less prone to "assume" them. Such calling out will make a given XP application more portable to another protocol (transport). All that said, it seems that DR305 failed to make that point to anyone's satisfaction. I guess we have more work to do. All the best, David
Received on Sunday, 19 November 2000 15:39:09 UTC