W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2003

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

From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 08:27:50 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

A requirement related to #3, high on our list, is "early" information
on the serialization parameters.  Knowing the size of objects
before they come at you on the wire allows much more efficient
response when the receiver resource are limited.  Knowing that
you will not be able to handle an object allows early and more
useful user feedback.

At 02:07 PM 7/2/2003 -0700, Mark Nottingham 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
>2) Reduce processing overhead during the generation and consumption of
>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.
>Mark Nottingham

John J. Barton          email:  John_Barton@hpl.hp.com
MS 1U-17  Hewlett-Packard Labs
1501 Page Mill Road              phone: (650)-236-2888
Palo Alto CA  94304-1126         FAX:   (650)-857-5100
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 11:27:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:23 UTC