W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-http-ng-comments@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: Thoughts on 19980710 drafts, do we need another object standard?

From: <Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 15:30:03 PDT
To: ken@bitsko.slc.ut.US
cc: www-http-ng-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <98Aug20.153030pdt."52069(1)"@alpha.xerox.com>
> > The biggest sticking point is the divergence in type systems between
> CORBA and DCOM...

> We've been prototyping with BER compressed integers, ...

While that's interesting for other reasons, I don't understand why it is a
reply to the remark of mine that you quoted.  I don't see how the wire encoding
techniques you describe addresses the areas where the type systems of CORBA and
DCOM have non-trivial differences.  More basically, it's not clear to me what
you're saying about type systems.

I've considered variable-length encodings for integers, but it seems to me that
when comparing with fixed-length encodings for fixed-range integer types we
have a real apples-and-oranges tradeoff: the variable-length encodings will
usually win in bytes-on-the-wire and lose in CPU time (they have to be
marshalled and unmarshalled by code with jumps, which cost big on modern CPUs).

I do think that dictionary-like representations are useful for composite data
in some cases --- I expect the wire encodings of my signature extension ideas
will use the dictionary pattern in some places, but not as simply and directly
as you suggest.  But I don't think it's necessarily appropriate for use in all
cases.
Received on Thursday, 20 August 1998 18:30:17 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 13:07:28 EDT