- From: M. Jones <sweetidad@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 08:36:28 -0800 (PST)
- To: www-archive@w3.org
- Cc: jones@research.att.com
- Use cases / real world need for the feature For some applications, a purely XML-based representation of the payload is awkward or inefficient. Examples of such cases include payloads which contain binary data, recursively structured envelopes, syntactically ill-formed XML fragments, etc. - Outline of one or more proposed solutions The most common packaging tactic in such cases is to introduce a multipart representation which carries the SOAP envelope and its related data (commonly referred to as "attachments"). "SOAP Messages with Attachments", published as a W3C note [http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments], is one proposed scheme; "Direct Internet Message Encapsulation (DIME)" [http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nielsen-dime-02.txt] is another. An abstract model for the SOAP 1.2 attachment feature [http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-af/] specifies how SOAP 1.2 bindings use attachments and how those attachments are referenced from the envelope. - Discussion of the controversies surrounding the feature 1. How does serialization of the SOAP envelope (primary part) interact with serialization of the attachments themselves (the secondary parts) and the serialization of the packaging glue itself? For example, if the SOAP HTTP binding is normally responsible for serialization of the SOAP envelope in a non-packaging context, how does a packaging feature binding extension modularly interact with the base binding? How does the packaging serialization interact with other features that involve re-codings for encryption, compression, etc.? 2. Concerns have been expressed about the issue of references. SOAP 1.2 has taken the position that web resources that get copied into attachments are new resources with their own URI schemes. The binding (in particular, the packaging feature binding extension) has the responsibility for resolving references to these resources. Is this the correct model for attachments? Can dereferencing schemes smoothly handle cases in which the attachments need to be treated as cached representations of web resources? __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Received on Thursday, 14 November 2002 11:40:43 UTC