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

Re: New attachments issues

From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:04:25 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20030612085338.02885760@hplex1.hpl.hp.com>
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
Cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

At 11:27 AM 6/12/2003 -0400, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
><snip>
>
>BTW (off topic):  Rich, I really liked your article at
>http://webservices.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/06/10/salz.html .


Indeed.  Suddenly I understand the header/intermediate stuff,
at least the theory.  So returning to my disagreement with Jacek
on Marc's questions about the potential for intermediates to
repackage the message, I think we could consider another case

   (v) intermediates may repackage any attachments to headers
they are allowed to process.

This allows applications to grant repackaging to intermediates
through their split between header and body.

In addition I suggest a intermediate "role" of message repackaging
with senders able to spec potential or required downstream packages.
This would allow intermediates between  e.g. senders that cannot
buffer large binary and receivers that cannot buffer large binaries;
the intermediate would buffer, count, and repackage.



______________________________________________________
John J. Barton          email:  John_Barton@hpl.hp.com
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm
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, 12 June 2003 12:04:44 GMT

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