Re: wire stack words and diagram

"Mark A. Jones" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Heather, Editors:

Here is some additional text which would fit at the end of the
Packaging section in the wire stack text that you sent around:

<maj>
For some applications, a purely XML-based representation of the
payload is awkward or inefficient.  Examples of such cases include
payloads which contain binary data, recursively structured envelopes,
syntactically ill-formed XML fragments, etc.  The most common
Packaging tactic in such cases is to introduce a multipart
representation which carries the SOAP envelope and its related data 
(commonly referred to as "attachments").  "SOAP Messages with 
Attachments", published as a W3C note 
[http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments], is one proposed scheme;
"Direct Internet Message Encapsulation (DIME)"
[http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nielsen-dime-02.txt] is
another.  An abstract model for SOAP 1.2 attachment features 
[http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-af/] specifies how SOAP 1.2 bindings use 
attachments and how those attachments are referenced from the envelope.
</maj>


--mark

Mark A. Jones
AT&T


Heather Kreger wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Here is the words I have for the wire stack.  Same caveats as before.
> 
> (See attached file: wire.ZIP)
> 
> Heather Kreger
> Web Services Lead Architect
> STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
> [email protected]
> 919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572
> 


-- 
Mark A. Jones
AT&T Labs
Shannon Laboratory
Room 2A-02
180 Park Ave.
Florham Park, NJ  07932-0971

email: [email protected]
phone: (973) 360-8326
   fax: (973) 236-6453
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.