RE: Abstract Model contribution for module processing and also fo r attachments

Hi Mark,

Firstly, I've added you the my mailing list of subgroup members so you'll
get any postings.

The module processing model that you propose looks interesting. I've got a
couple of questions:

1) How does the term 'module application' relate to the terms 'XML protocol
application' and 'XML protocol handler'?

2) I can see how what you propose give us an algebraic way for expressing
structure like those shown in Fig 5.2[1]. Have you any thoughts on
constraints on parallel processing? eg. practically I think it hard to
imagine a parallel construct extending over multiple intermediaries.

3) You mention the possibility that module processing might generate a fault
(Concept list #3). Have you any thought on fault propagation? Do they
terminate the processing of a message? Do they feed-forward toward the
intended recipient of the processed message or do they get returned toward
the originator of the message?

4) Does the syntactic ordering of 'result' blocks inserted into a message
have any significance and is there a need to model that?


On the attachment model in the second part of the document:

1) In concepts item 2 would it be clearer to refer to message context rather
than processing context?


Best regards and many thanks,

Stuart


[1]
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/02/16-abstract-model/XMLProtocolAMG.html/#
Fig5.2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark A. Jones [mailto:jones@research.att.com]
> Sent: 05 March 2001 18:33
> To: Ray Denenberg; Ray Whitmer; Marwan Sabbouh; Henrik 
> Frystyk Nielsen;
> Stuart Williams; David Fallside
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Abstract Model contribution for module processing 
> and also for
> attachments
> 
> 
> [David, Stuart:  I would like to be added to the Abstract Model
> subgroup.]
> 
> [Stuart:  The attachment here reflects some thinking that I have been
> doing on an Abstract Model specification for Module 
> Processing.  It also
> contains some ideas on Attachments.  I would like to solicit general
> discussion and offer them as starting points for inclusion in the
> Abstract Model document.]
> 
> [Ray D., Ray W., Mahwan, Henrik:  For me to think clearly about how to
> consider RPC, I needed to first attempt to clarify some kind 
> of abstract
> model for Module Processing first.  This is what you'll find in the
> attachment.  It makes a small reference to RPC.  If you like the
> framework, then maybe we can clarify what RPC is in this context.  It
> seems like it is primarily a convention for how to interpret 
> the markup
> in a block and how to interpret the return result.]
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2001 05:43:45 UTC