- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:23:59 +0100
- To: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, Noah Mendelsohn <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
This is a follow up of the discussion that just occurred at the f2f. Consider the message below. A simple inspection of the message is enough for a node to determine it should process blocks <X> and <PlayTheFollowingRole>, and only these two blocks. Processing then starts. However, during the evaluation of <PlayTheFollowingRole>, the node also discovers that it must play the role "meAsWell". If it assumes this new role, it breaks the invariant (on roles - i154); if it does not, it breaks the contract represented by <PlayTheFollowingRole>. <envelope> <header> <X actor="next" mU="true">...</Y> <PlayTheFollowingRole actor="next" mU="true">meAsWell</X> <Y actor="meAsWell" mU="true">...</Z> </header> </envelope> Is it important for us to support such changing roles? Jean-Jacques.
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2001 10:25:05 UTC