• To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Subject: RE: Why XML for Messaging?
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 20:56:41 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: 'Chiusano Joseph' <chiusano_joseph@b...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206FBC@h...>

> I'll bet a beer:  when we finally get Longhorn and
> look under the covers, we'll discover MS optimized
> the blazes out of some XML pieces by subsetting it
> and being very persnickety about substitutions.

I betcha the SOAP stack is optimized to leave out DTD's.
I have no inside knowledge.
	/r$

-- 
Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Why XML for Messaging?
    • From: Michael Champion <michaelc.champion@g...>

• References:
  • RE: Why XML for Messaging?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Why XML for Messaging?
• Next by Date: RE: Why XML for Messaging?
• Previous by thread: RE: Why XML for Messaging?
• Next by thread: Re: Why XML for Messaging?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread