spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The Case For XML in "Caller-ID for Email"

2004-01-23 05:35:25
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 12:57:33PM +0100, Julian Mehnle wrote:

To reiterate myself:  What's the difference between

| v=spf1 mx -all
|
|   becomes
| 
| v=spf2 mx newfeature:foo -all

and

| <spf xmlns='http://spf.info/1'><mx/></spf>
| 
|   becomes
| 
| <spf xmlns='http://spf.info/2'><mx/><newfeature>foo</newfeature></spf>

with regard to extensibility?

I just don't get it.

<metoo/>

In both cases, chances are my client has no way of knowing how to process
the v2 record, thus I have to ignore the entire record.  Otherwise, I may
misinterpret "newfeature" and make a wrong decision.

XML is great for fuzzy stuf that can be ignored.

If I would write <strong>text</> and "strong" is not recognized or cannot
be processed, just ignore it and read "if I would write text". It is likely
the emphasis can be seen from the context.

If newfeature would be, for instance, "ask_whitelist" and if I do not
recognize this new feature, "<ask_whitelist>10.1.2.3</><default>-</>"
could be rather dangerous if I decide to ignore only the new feature.


I hope I didn't show my ignorance on XML here; if I did: The misterious
stakeholder didn't explain his (her) case well enough for me to know I
should change my mind.

Alex
-- 
begin  sig
http://www.googlism.com/index.htm?ism=alex+van+den+bogaerdt&type=1
This message was produced without any <iframe tags

-------
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?¡