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

RE: Optimisations other than Base64

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 02:53:26 -0700
Message-ID: <7C083876C492EB4BAAF6B3AE0732970E0C3A0BF3@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <eugene@datapower.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

MTOM provides for a specific kind of optimization, namely serializing
particular things as raw binary in separate parts of a multipart/related
package. I think the notion of a binary XML is in a completely different
space.

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Eugene Kuznetsov
> Sent: 29 July 2003 23:04
> To: 'Mark Nottingham'; 'Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org'
> Subject: RE: Optimisations other than Base64
> 
> 
> 
> > 1. Should MTOM accommodate encodings/optimizations other 
> than base64?
> >     a. If so, should the list be open-ended (i.e., extensible)?
> 
> I think so. base64, while popular, is decidedly "old-tech". 
> Maybe there will be some new outcome from the binary XML 
> discussions, maybe other technologies can be applied in other 
> "transfer syntax" configurations, to use an ASN.1 term. The 
> important thing is to get everyone agreeing on how such 
> configurations are designated and to define a 
> lowest-common-denominator. Special applications (high 
> performance, low-bandwidth, etc.) are likely to have different needs. 
> 
> \\ Eugene Kuznetsov
> \\ eugene@datapower.com
> \\ DataPower Technology, Inc.
> \\ http://www.datapower.com - XS40 XML Security Gateway 
>  
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2003 05:53:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:14 GMT