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

Re: Optimisations other than Base64

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 18:49:26 -0400
To: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Cc: "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF630D0690.CB6CB852-ON85256D72.00798D98@lotus.com>

Right.  I think we need to also relate this to the ongoing analysis of the 
XQuery/XPath data model.  That model provides for all legal schema types. 
So, we need to consider all of these aspects of the question.  Then again, 
it seems to me that the tough question is going to be, whether for base64 
only or for more types: what do you reconstruct at the receiver, and what 
are the intermediary rules.  One might take the view that optimizing more 
than one type encourages one to send the actual type label as part of the 
model.  Certainly the XQuery model suggests that the type information is 
first class in the model, and not just plumbing for the optimization.  I 
think that will be one of the main interesting questions for the subgroup 
that explores the multitype question. 

In any case, thanks for openning the issue.  Cheers.

Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
07/29/2003 05:43 PM

        To:     "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
        cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
        Subject:        Optimisations other than Base64

I took an action item at the F2F to raise a new issue.

1. Should MTOM accommodate encodings/optimizations other than base64?
    a. If so, should the list be open-ended (i.e., extensible)?
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2003 18:55:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:24 UTC