- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:47:09 +0100
- To: "Williams Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: frystyk@microsoft.com, "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@akamai.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
"Williams, Stuart" wrote: > I think that there may be value in being able to 'tag' blocks with something > that identifies their originator, however, I don't think that "Fig 2.1@AM" > implies that. Fig-2.1 shows examples of sub-conversations: b-c (block2), d-f (block3) and d-g (block4). Showing this on our introductory figure probably means sub-conversations are important. If they are important (and I do think they are), then we probably ought to be supporting them in XMLP Core. If we don't, then maybe they should not appear on fig-2.1. Jean-Jacques.
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 08:48:13 UTC