To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
CC:
EPP Provreg <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>
Date:
Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:07:15 +0100
In-Reply-To:
<046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF0702ECE116@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.6pre) Gecko/20091104 Shredder/3.0pre
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] Anyone working on 4310-bis?
On 05/11/09 13:16, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: > I'm referring to XML command structures for which an order can be > explicitly specified, such as elements within a sequence. It's > certainly not a new concept because the specifications have been this > way since the very beginning (the same quote can be found in RFC 3730 > from 2004). If the order wasn't intended to be significant I wouldn't > have used sequences. > > Scott > Well, XML is not a not a command structure but a hierarchical syntax for documents, with XML Schema being one of multiple choices of overlaying it with rules. Anyway, for my taste tying the logic of a high level protocol that tightly to its transport representation is a design weakness, more abstraction would be a boon. But it is wasted time to argue -- it is nothing new that we have diametric opinions on certain topics... Regards, Klaus -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se