RE: [dss] Discussion on outstanding issues for the core.

[Juan Carlos Cruellas Ibarz <cruellas@ac.upc.es>]

1. Mmmm I am now thinking of those recommendations whose 
structure is defined in XML schema BUT not in DTD. There are, of course
tools not extremely expensive that convert from one to the other... 
So, we have to choose between have to face situations where the
server can not offer the service because there is no means for
receiving a XML schema, and in consequence not provide the service
even if it could do that, or make optional the capability of processing one
of the forms so that we do not preclude developers to incorporate them.

2. Yes, network connection... I would say that the service (not the protocolo)
would be more dependant on the quality of network services, but all this
story is relaying on the assumption that a network connection of a certain
quality is something not so difficult to achieve....

Juan Carlos
At 11:18 11/05/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>At 12:47 PM 5/11/2004 +0200, you wrote:
>>A couple of  questions,
>>
>>1. I would substitute mentions to DTDs by DTDs or Schemas,
>>just for avoiding questions.
>
>That means servers need to be able to process DTDs or Schemas..  I think 
>asking servers to handle DTDs is bad enough, I'd rather not require them to 
>do both.
>
>
>>2 should the DTD (XML schema) being necessarily transmited or
>>could also be possible just incorporate a URI pointing to the place
>>where it is published? I would initially be in favour of allowing both
>>mechanisms.
>
>That requires the server to have a network connection (or have pre-cached 
>the DTD/Schema), or else the protocol fails.
>
>This makes the protocol more fragile.  So is it worth adding?
>
>
>Trevor 
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dss/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>