On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:51:52PM -0800, David Orchard wrote: > Mike, I agree with you. I believe that the statement should read "can be > less simple to configure and degrade network and perceived performance". > This focuses the issue on simplicity and performance impacts of visibility. > As an example of the XPath usage, instead of cache "GET on URI X", it's > cache on "XYZ on URI X with XPath Foo=true". Obviously this won't work if > the message is encrypted. I think the trade-off is clear. Caching of just > a URI is simpler than with XPath, but certainly not insurmountable. Fair enough. But do you agree with Mike that visibility is *improved* by the SOA style, or not? You previously claimed it was reduced. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysisReceived on Tuesday, 25 February 2003 08:11:48 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT