On May 7, 2007, at 10:59 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, 07 May 2007 19:38:15 +0200, Innovimax SARL
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does it mean a conformant implementation could support NO
version of
XML?
Yes, in theory.
Isn't there any possibility to put it other way such that at least
one
version must be supported ?
I'm not sure how that would be an advantage for people using
wanting to implement this API in some obscure language. At some
point when we get responseBody this will become a relatively simple
API to do HTTP stuff with. I don't think we should mandate XML
support for that. It makes sense to support it though, hence it
already is a "SHOULD" for fostering interoperability.
Can we define a conformance class for implementations that support
XML parsing, so that we can have MUST-level requirements and a test
suite for that conformance class? This seems better to me than a SHOULD.
Regards,
Maciej
