Re: Requirements for attachments^H^H^H transport optimisation

Mark Nottingham <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.distributed
Message-ID <[email protected]>
A better place for this discussion might be the XML Binary 
Characterisation WG;
   http://www.w3.org/XML/Binary/

That's not to say that these aren't important considerations for MTOM, 
but the XBCWG was formed specifically to talk about them.

Regards,


On Jul 3, 2004, at 7:46 AM, Patrick Steer wrote:

>
>
>
>
> I think it would be useful to spend a little time identifying the 
> higher-level requirements surrounding MTOM and the like. These are the 
> ones I'm aware of: 1) Reduce "bytes on the wire", to improve bandwidth 
> usage / transport latency. 2) Reduce processing overhead during the 
> generation and consumption of messages. 3)
> Enable selective reordering in the serialization of message 
> components, to allow flexibility in processing. The third deserves a 
> bit more explanation; a use case might be placing a large binary file 
> after the SOAP envelope in the serialized message, so that an 
> intermediary (or ultimate receiver, for that matter) can act upon the 
> message before reading all of the bytes off the wire.
>
> Are there any other high-level requirements associated with the 
> abstract MTOM feature? I think it would be nice to call these out in 
> the document at some point. It would also be good to note that these 
> can all be seen as encoding issues and nothing more.
> http://xml.project-web.org
> http://ebooks.die-werbung.de
> http://project-web.org
>
>

--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
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.