- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:45:24 -0400 (EDT)
- To: <asirv@webmethods.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>, <hugo@w3.org>, <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> +1 to "guaranteed to be optimizable", if there is such a subtype
> of base64Binary.
> Reading thru this thread, possibilities are, sender/receiver:
> (a) knows what to optimize (magic
> (b) learns what to optimize (say, from a schema (via hints)
> (c) optimizes per directions from a user
> (d) determines on the fly - walks thru an infoset hunting for element
> content to be optimized
interesting enumeration, and i can see how these would particularly
apply when working at the document level, generically trying to optimise
XML into SOAP messages on the fly.
but for an agent constructing a message described in WSDL, my
understanding is all that is required is a type which can contain a
base64 encoded string, even as Noah said: xs:string.
so i don't follow what further hints are required in WSDL. an agent
can make intelligent (or dumb) decisions at runtime whether to optimise
an element based upon all sorts of criteria not know at describe time
including:
1) size of the content to be encoded
2) current channel bandwidth/utilisation
3) current memory / CPU utilisation
4) network has per-byte charging
5) other misc policies
Paul
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 16:05:29 UTC