- 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