> > The idea as expressed here sounds a little kludgy. What I
> think we are
> > talking about in general terms is to have a (potentially) complex
> > response message format (with lots of nullable/optional
> elements) and
> > a negotiation mechanism for the client and server to agree what
> > optional elements the client wants and the server supports.
>
> I wasn't thinking of anything nearly as complicated.
No - you weren't *yet*
A rich negotiation mechanism is the logical conclusion of the "element
set" notion you outlined. My fear is that taking on board the "element
set" idea will be a slippery slope where we either end up with a
negotiation mechanism or we end up with a messy series of ad hoc
mechanisms for lots of options which would be better replacing with a
negotiation mechanism.
I suppose I'm arguing that we either embrace this optional elements
issue fully or not at all.
Matthew
|