W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > June 2001

Re: Proposed Clarification for Issues 4 and 23

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:34:42 -0400
To: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
Cc: henrikn@microsoft.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF2C1DBAC7.9344B514-ON85256A72.0076747F@lotus.com>
Are we sure we want to get into PI's?  One of the nice things about 
writing an efficient SOAP processor is you don't need to deal with quite 
all the minutia of general XML.  As this discussion illustrates, even 
small features like PI cause complexity:  must you fault?  can you fault? 
what does it mean to understand a PI?  If SOAP doesn't allow PI, do we 
really have sufficiently compelling reasons to reintroduce them?  Also, it 
feels to me like there might be some question as to which PI's are to be 
interpreted generically to the envelope, and which would have to be 
understood by the code processing, for example, a header.  Are we sure the 
value outweighs the added details to be gotten right (in both spec and 

Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2001 17:39:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:36 UTC