- From: christopher ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:03:46 -0400
- To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- CC: David Clay <david.clay@oracle.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Received on Monday, 11 June 2001 12:06:00 UTC
I'm curious as to what manner of discomfort? Header blocks could be considered "pre-processing" for the Body and Trailer blocks "post-processing" of the Body. For instance, if I wanted to have the message signed after processing of the Body, a Trailer might be much more appropriate than a Header block which needed to be deferred until after the Body (and/or other Headers) were processed. I think that we should strive for simplification. Adding in (or simply clarifying in) the ability to stick "stuff" in the Envelope after the Body element without providing any processing guidance as has been provided for Headers seems to me to be arbitrary and would lead to confusion not increased clarity. Cheers, Chris Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote: > > christopher ferris wrote: > > > I am curious as to why the trailers aren't > > XMLP Blocks? > > Making trailers ordinary blocks (and hence having a unified processing > model) would indeed simplify the spec, remove a number of ambiguities, and > enable us to build simpler (and more maintainable) implementations. However, > this option does seem to cause some incomfort... > > Jean-Jacques.
Received on Monday, 11 June 2001 12:06:00 UTC