- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 17:51:55 -0800
- To: <rden@loc.gov>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
The word "user" always tends to mean "human user" which I don't think we necessarily want this always to be. Actually, I think the term "XMLP Application" for the set of handlers associated with an XMLP processor to be ok. Henrik >This confusion between service in the abstract and real >service is what I think we need to avoid. In the abstract (the >old OSI service conventions), layer N provides "service" to >layer N+1. I think we need to avoid using "service" in that >sense. The workshop is about applications. That's what they >mean by "services". > >I also don't like the use of "client" in this context, because >of the confusion with the client/server model. > > I suggest "XMLP user".
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2001 20:52:29 UTC