[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Walter Perry writes:
>When an XML document arrives at a Web process, that process
>should--and should be expected to--execute and render a Web output--a
>URL--and not just do the dumb work of routing which could be more
>efficiently and more appropriately done at the much lower IP level.
That's my own conclusion, yes. At the same time, however, there are
still interesting questions because:
1) Some folks don't see "Web processes" as anything beyond transport
2) There are lots of options (BEEP, etc.) which are XML-based but
explicitly not part of the Web.
(2) makes me more willing to think about these issues than (1), though
(1) is certainly the case where I more frequently encounter them.
>the problem is simple enough that looking inside the message to
>discover what well-known schema its contents might conform to seems an
>entirely legitimate way of seeing that the message gets to the right
>network address--which is what Don Box now seems to be advocating.
I think I'm mostly wondering if that's an appropriate strategy for
particular kinds of XML processors that operate outside the Web
paradigm.
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
|
