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

Re: use cases for MTOM

From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 14:59:25 -0700
Cc: "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
To: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Message-Id: <B61988BE-E247-11D7-AC8D-00039396E15A@bea.com>


My .02 -

On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 11:22  AM, Anish Karmarkar wrote:
>
> XMLP-UC-1: based on 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-arch-scenarios-20020730/#S090 .....

Strictly speaking, this doesn't require anything beyond base64Binary.

> XMLP-UC-2: an application that uses URI to deref resources, and 
> assumes the only representation travels with the message

Is this still an in-scope use case? I think we need to discuss this.

> XMLP-UC-3: an application that uses middleware/SOAP-stack to deref 
> resources, and assumes the only representation travels with the > message

This feels more like implementation details to me, with some implied 
requirements.

> XMLP-UC-4: digital camera wants to encrypt and/or sign the message 
> and/or binary data

Is this a requirement (that it work with encryption/digsig)?

> XMLP-UC-5: message with binary data successfully goes through SOAP 1.2 
> intermediary

Sounds like a requirement to work with intermediaries.

> XMLP-UC-6: a representation is streamed upon receipt when sender 
> and/or receiver is constrained

Yes; we should discuss whether this is a motivation for the work, and 
whether MTOM enables it.

> XMLP-UC-7 (meta): WSDL is is applicable where appropriate

Sounds like a requirement.

> XMLP-UC-8: representation is a digital camera produced VLOB

???
Received on Monday, 8 September 2003 18:01:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:15 GMT