W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

RE: Resolving the Ed Note in Part 1 section 5.1 (was New Issues)

From: S. Alexander Jacobson <alex@vo.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:48:22 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
To: xml-dist-app <xml-dist-app@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.43.0201291539390.1400-100000@gandolph.ASGARD.jms>
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Williams, Stuart wrote:
> Hmmm.... nesting envelopes feels like it might be fraught with some of the
> difficulties of nesting XML - document scoped artifacts, id collisions,
> charset issues...

I just arrived on this list, so if this is a FAQ,
please just refer me to the answer..

Since you so often will want to send XML or
other binary objects between parties, using an
XML envelop in general seems like a bad idea.

It seems better to use MIME as your envelope
format (see http://mime-rpc.com for an example).

I know of the SOAP with attachments spec, but it
seems to create the new problem of the SOAP schema
type conflicting with attachment's mime type.

Another alternative is to base64 encode
everything, but this is even uglier.

-Alex-



___________________________________________________________________
S. Alexander Jacobson                   i2x Media
1-212-787-1914 voice                    1-603-288-1280 fax
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 15:47:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:06 GMT