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
