- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:26:37 +0200
- To: christopher ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>
- CC: David Clay <david.clay@oracle.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Chris, Talking about simplification, do you think it would be a further simplification to have Bodies be just ordinary blocks, as has been suggested earlier several times? Jean-Jacques. christopher ferris wrote: > 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 12:26:51 UTC