|
John
You said, If I understand the oid attribute correctly, the receiver may maintain a mapping from oids to element nodes in its internal representation, and what the sender must guarantee is that if the oid is the same, the other attributes, their values, and the content of the element are the same as before. At least, that is the way that ETags work. Is that correct? I say, Bingo. Dead nuts on. That's it. ADDITIONALLY it provides for partial updates, to say for example a trivial label updates in a complex object, You CAN just give me OID plus the new or changed stuff if you support that, otherwise you can regenerate the whole thing on your end and feed it all to me and in the end its the same. 1 fast way, 1 slow way. Brian From: johnwcowan@gmail.com Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:14:47 -0400 To: amyzing@talsever.com CC: xml-dev@lists.xml.org Subject: Re: [xml-dev] RFC for XML Object Parsing On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@talsever.com> wrote:
Sure it is. It's an additional convention that a specialized XML processor (and serializer) can take advantage of if it understands it.
If I understand the oid attribute correctly, the receiver may maintain a mapping from oids to element nodes in its internal representation, and what the sender must guarantee is that if the oid is the same, the other attributes, their values, and the content of the element are the same as before. At least, that is the way that ETags work. Is that correct?
GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine at http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures |