RE: Masters (was RE: Personal reply)

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Communicators negotiate that.   We can provide a 
means to do that; we can't dictate the results.

Politics is local.  Walter is right.  But 
commitment requires at least two: one to act 
and one to verify results of an action.  We 
don't have to insist that schemas are the 
means.  We have to insist means exist and that 
use of the means have predictable and verifiable 
results.  So test on receipt or test on transmission. 
WAP tests on transmission so WAP agents, by 
prearranged agreement don't have to care.  

When do you commit and how?  That is all 
you have to work out.

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 2:03 PM
To: XML DEV
Subject: Masters (was RE: Personal reply)


At 01:53 PM 3/12/01 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>`The question is,' said UserAgent, `which is to be master -- that's all.'

Sure thing, Len.  But who exactly is to be 
master?  Senders?  Recipients?  Customers?  Suppliers?  Committees?