[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>, XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@xml.org>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 10:41:55 -0500
However, if we wish to alter their behavior, one recourse
is to provide the definitive test that enables one to
discover that their implementation is aberrant. In
that way, systems that must inteoperate play tit for tat
and on detecting bad behavior, route around it to look
for an alternative service. MIT and other Kerberos
community officials document the non-interoperability
of the implementation and give it a low rating.
I agree completely about base services. It is a problem
everywhere I look in XML languages particularly those
that are being re-represented in so called supersets.
We've discussed this before as the contract for behavioral
fidelity and how that contract has to be testably
expressed in the standards language.
Simplistic, I realize, but I think you get the point.
Children that play well together are rewarded and
those that don't go to time out.
Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@mediaone.net]
In the XML community, particularly for the SAX protocol, the xml-dev list
sets standards of behavior. Perhaps we define simply 'not playing nice with
the other children' as what was done wrong.
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
