Anish Karamarkar writes:
>> We have already accepted use case UC6 [2]
I'm not being fascetious here, but MTOM is a layered system, and we need
to be clear on the layers to which our use cases apply. At the highest
level, we clearly meet this use case already. I suspect that those who
proposed it also want it to apply to the particular serialization we are
recommending, but we should probably say so.
FWIW: for exactly the reasons Gudge has raised, I have some concerns
about our having approved UC-6. The concerns are not strong enough for me
personally to request that we reopen the question if we have a "status
quo" decision, but I am sympathetic to the downsides of having to do
reference counting at intermediaries. Depending on how implementations
work, this could require intermediaries to do a much more careful parse
than would otherwise be necessary. Without this, I could go into a
well-formedness check on headers not targeted at me, at least in many
cases. With this, I will almost surely have to check them for
xbinc:includes so I can count 'em up. Seems like complexity to me. If
there is a compelling need for the use case, fair enough. If it's on the
20 side of 80/20, I have some doubts. Thank you!
Noah
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/3/10/wd/soap-os-ucr.html
--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
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.