[Repost] Re: Must understand mustUnderstand proposal

[The next couple of messages are a repost of a conversation that took
place outside the mailing list. My humble apologies for not having
cc:'ed the mailing list initially.]

Forwarded message 1

  • From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
  • Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 11:40:09 +0200
  • Subject: [Fwd: Must understand mustUnderstand proposal]
  • To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
  • CC: David Fallside <fallside@us.ibm.com>, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>, Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
  • Message-ID: <3AF91079.86F03A8A@crf.canon.fr> 
Henrik,

I haven't checked the issues list recently; did you manage to include
the issue Stuart brought up?

Jean-Jacques.

Forwarded message 2

  • From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
  • Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:52:33 +0200
  • Subject: Re: Must understand mustUnderstand proposal
  • To: "Williams Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
  • CC: "'Martin Gudgin'" <marting@develop.com>, XML Protocol Comments <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
  • Message-ID: <3AF17EC1.757C5895@crf.canon.fr> 
"Williams, Stuart" wrote:

> It is interesting to ask what might happen in the case where the targetted
> block is also referenced from elsewhere in the message. Do those links break
> on
> deletion? Do they get reasserted on 'substitution'?

Sounds like you've caught up a new issue!

Jean-Jacques.

Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2001 03:45:18 UTC