[BXXPwg] updated I-Ds submitted

Marshall Rose mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us
Fri, 15 Sep 2000 18:11:00 -0700

I've submitted several arguments already regarding the "start/profile
> piggyback" topic. Are the archived discussions considered sufficient?
> That is, are we awaiting others to add to the discussion? My silence
> in the last few weeks is meant to avoid redundancy, not to conciliate.

hi. sorry for the delay in responding. i don't think that your messages are
being ignored.

the issue i'm trying to get over is this: in the original design, xml
enjoyed a favored position in a few areas, because it was easy to accomodate
it. one of these was the piggybacking facility.

in the recent discussions, it's been suggested that we generalize the
piggybacking facility to accomodate profiles that don't use xml by using
character data instead of nested elements.

while i won't get too worked up over making beep more friendly towards
profiles that don't use xml, the problem is that in doing so, we're making
it harder for xml-based profiles.

however, since no one else seems to have an issue with this, it's probably
just easier to pretend that optimization never existed and put them all on
an equal footing.