[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [emergency-msg] DOM?
We can discuss it Thursday, but the more we can hash it out on the list here, the better. I am not opposed to this, but I would like to hear more opinions. Cheers, Rex At 1:57 PM +1000 8/22/06, Renato Iannella wrote: >The "DOM" needs some fixing: > >1 - since the cardinality is defined per message type, there should >not be any mandatory/conditional fields >on the generic model > >2 - DOM is not the correct term to use, as a DOM is an "API to >parsing structured information" >Can we just call it the "Resource Messaging Model" ? > >3 - We had previous discussion on the 'hybrid-model" - there is not >that much difference now, only the schedule info >are all group together and the response has explicit >accept/decline/reason elements. > >Comments? > >Cheers... Renato Iannella >National ICT Australia (NICTA) > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >This email and any attachments may be confidential. They may contain legally >privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, >use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended >recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both >messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, >data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised >amendment. This notice should not be removed. -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-849-2309
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]