RE: xp requirement document specifies headers

> From: Hugo Haas [mailto:hugo@w3.org]
> Sent: 23 January 2001 20:25
> To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> Cc: Eric Prud'hommeaux; xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: xp requirement document specifies headers
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2001, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> > I think it would be nice to express this as a requirement and a
> > usage scenario - maybe expand a little on Yves' scenario below.
> 
> Eric's example[1] is a good one: one could want to include an MD5 sum
> of an XP message (or of a particular block) that every intermediary
> would check over an unreliable carrier protocol, and it would make
> sense to put it at the end.

Knowing that its coming and what it needs to be computed over might also be
useful if you want to do things on the flys as the message passes through.
So some structure ahead of the block being checksummed would also be useful,
even if the checksum follows at the end.

> 
> His point of not defining two structures with the similar semantics
> (two collection of blocks to be processed by an XP processor) allows
> trailers.
> 
> Expressing this idea using a requirement is that the XML Protocol
> object model should be kept simple, which would go in section 4.2
> Simplicity and Stability (3xx).
> 
>   1. 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Jan/0121.html
> 
> -- 
> Hugo Haas - W3C/MIT
> mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/ - 
> tel:+1-617-452-2092

Regards

Stuart

Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2001 14:55:16 UTC