- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:06:43 -0400
- To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <martin.gudgin@btconnect.com>, <jacek@systinet.com>
I guess I'm not quite sure why it matters where serialization starts, but since those of you who implement the system seem to need to want to know, I won't slow down the discussion further. I had presumed that, in the latest design, serialization covered all elements within the scope of suitable "encodingStyle" elements, with no notion of where the serialiation starts. Bottom line: I'm still not sure why we would need such a concept, but don't waste time trying to convince me. Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Martin Gudgin" <martin.gudgin@btconnect.com> Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 04/24/02 11:10 AM To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Subject: Re: Proposal for dealing with root ----- Original Message ----- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com> Cc: <martin.gudgin@btconnect.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:35 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for dealing with root > I'm asking what "serialization root" means. The encoding exists only to > move the graph from one place to another. What does it mean to have a > root concept in the encoding that's not in the graph? Well, one could argue that even with a graph that has no root, serialization has to start somewhere... Gudge
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 09:40:05 UTC