How do I unsubscribe

["mail.philippinesgo.com" <joe@philippinesgo.com>]

Please take me off the list
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>
To: Miller, Robert (GXS) <Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com>
Cc: <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>; <ebXML-transport@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: FW: Latest Specification document


> Bob,
>
> PIs may be well used, but they are a PAIN
> to use IMO. You need to separately parse the
> text contained within a PI to make it meaningful
> for starters. (at least, that has been my
> experience, I could be pounding my head against
> the wall for naught;-)
>
> Clearly, we need not wait for XML Schema to
> use attributes such as type, xmlns and version.
> How this is inherently more complicated than
> PIs is beyond me.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> "Miller, Robert (GXS)" wrote:
> >
> > That's not a problem, regardless of the solution. The header is a
standalone
> > XML document, as are any other XML documents packaged in the MIME
envelope.
> > Each such document stands on its own.
> >
> > When/If W3C Schema becomes an approved recommendation, Murray's solution
> > should work just fine (though somewhere along the way it needs to pick
up an
> > ebXML version number).  Even so, it impresses me as inherently more
> > complicated than using a simple PI, which I continue to support.
> >
> > I certainly do not understand all the fuss about some folks associated
with
> > W3C not liking PI's, which are after all a well used (<?xml ...> XML 1.0
> > feature.  If W3C doesn't like PI's then let them remove the <?xml ...>.
> > Till then, I'll stnad my position.
> >
> > The XML 1.0 documentation clearly states "PI's are not part of the
> > document's character data, but must be passed through to the
application."
> > That's about as straightforward as it can get to me.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >         Bob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com [mailto:john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 4:57 AM
> > To: Miller, Robert (GXS)
> > Cc: ebXML-transport@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: FW: Latest Specification document
> >
> > One problem with this is that the TP&R WG proposal does not have a
single
> > root element. We use a MIME envelope containing a number of separate
header
> > and payload documents.
> >
> > John
> >
> > MQSeries Technical Strategy & Planning,
> > IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park,
> > Winchester, SO21 2JN
> >
> > Tel: +44 (0)1962 815188
> > Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898
> > Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM
> > email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
> >
> > "Miller, Robert (GXS)" <Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com> on 02/05/2000 19:09:01
> >
> > Please respond to "Miller, Robert (GXS)" <Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com>
> >
> > To:   ebXML-transport@lists.oasis-open.org,
> >       ebXML-Architecture@lists.oasis-open.org
> > cc:    (bcc: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM)
> > Subject:  FW: Latest Specification document
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > The Architecture Document (Section 3.5.5 a)(TechArch group) currently
> > proposes that an ebXML document be framed within an 'ebXML' element.
> > TR&P is referenced in an Editor's note to this rule. See below:
> >
> >   a)      The message will use a root tag of <ebXML> to identify it as
an
> > ebXML compliant transaction.
> >
> >   [EDITORS NOTE:  THE TRP GROUP MUST EITHER ADOPT THIS OR SPECIFY AN
> > ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION ELEMENT OR METHOD]
> >
> > I do not support this means of identification, and propose instead that
an
> > XML conformant document include a 'Processing Instruction' asserting
ebXML
> > compliance.  I suggest:
> >
> >      <?ebXML version='1.0' reference='someURI'>
> >
> > where 'version' provides the ebXML version to which compliance is
claimed,
> > and
> >       'reference' provides a URI for use in accessing a repository of
> > metadata relating to this message.
> >
> > I believe this approach is less intrusive upon XML syntax.  It
eliminates
> > the need, if a DTD (or other schema declaration)is used, to define an
ebXML
> > element and its allowed content.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >         Bob