- From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:41:47 -0800
- To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Perhaps I can add some insight into the original motivation. The thought was that one might have a message encoded according to the section 5 rules. Call this rule A. One might also have, while consistent with the section 5 rules, applied some additional rules, such as avoiding forward references. Call this rule B. It was thought useful to indicate both, so that an application which understands only rule A could process the message correctly, while an application that understands rules A and B could take advantage of the extra information to process the message more efficiently. The value of the encodingStyle attribute would be "B A". -----Original Message----- From: Jacek Kopecky [mailto:jacek@systinet.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 4:14 AM To: xml-dist-app@w3.org Subject: proposed resolution to issues #159 and #166 - encodingStyle Hi all. 8-) The ETF proposes the following resolution to the issues 159 and 166, both dealing with the type of the encodingStyle attribute being a list of URIs identifying encoding styles in the order from the most specific to the least specific. The proposal is to make the attribute be of type anyURI and indicate a single style. Motivation: For the discussion that resulted in this you can see [1] and the resulting thread. The participants in the thread generally seemed to agree that the presented resolution is the way to go, especially since nobody was able to bring up a valid scenario for using more than a single value of the attribute. The two examples brought up in the thread both were about multiple _different_ encodings in one message which is handled by the encodingStyle attribute scoping. Also, no real-world usage of multiple values in one encodingStyle attribute was demonstrated, nor conceived by the participants in the thread. If we wanted to keep the status quo, we would need to specify what "most specific to least specific" means with respect to encoding styles and this would unnecessarily complicate the spec. Best regards Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox) http://www.systinet.com/ [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Oct/0330.html
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 16:43:15 UTC