On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 01:17:42PM -0600, wayne wrote:
| In <20040121185921(_dot_)GD6875(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> Meng Weng
Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
|
| > In theory, extensibility will be built in [if we use XML].
|
| I guess I disagree with this. We *could* have allowed unrecognized
| mechanisms to be ignored in SPF. I think we made the right decision
| to not silently ignore typos.
|
| I do not understand XML that well, but I can't see how new mechanisms
| can be created and understood by those systems that need to check SPF
| records.
I read the XML documents several times while trying to write a parser for
the C language. While 2 or 3 already do exist, they either and awkward
to use due to the way they exchange data with the caller, or are buggy,
or both. I use EXPAT now, but it is frequently troublesome. Once I read
the XML documentation, I realized that things get exceeding complex very
fast if you want to handle everything. And if you don't handle everything
then it can't be called an XML parser. Of course we could use existing
parsers, which do exist for all major languages. But do you want to add
that weight and depend on yet more breakable (because someone else has to
deal with the fixes) components? Of course not everyone needs SPF to be
lightweight. But I think we should not make SPF be heavyweight by design.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/ http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡