- From: Rolf H. Nelson <rnelson@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 12:12:36 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-talk@w3.org
- CC: Craig Thompson <thompson@objs.com>, Venu Vasudevan <venu@objs.com>, koike@ccm.cl.nec.co.jp, kamba@ccm.cl.nec.co.jp, marc@ccm.cl.nec.co.jp
Venu gave me permission to forward this message publicly. -Rolf ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Sender: venuv@w3.org Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:02:15 -0800 From: Venu Vasudevan <venu@objs.com> X-Accept-Language: en To: rnelson@w3.org Subject: OBJS comments on the PIDL submission Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------C1DF78CD97ECF479ED5696D8" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------C1DF78CD97ECF479ED5696D8 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------FA296FC17088169A43815F7B" - --------------FA296FC17088169A43815F7B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Below are our comments on the recent PIDL (Personalized Information Description Language) submission to W3C. I can be reached at venu@objs.com for any subsequent discussions or clarifications. Regards, Venu. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- PIDL is an interesting application of database view definition technology to page personalization on the web. We have the following comments relating to the current proposal: * PIDL is an interesting blend of view virtualization and view materialization. o In that it stores "views as queries" it is a virtual view approach o in that it allows agents to "process" (i.e materialize) a view, and then adds the materialized results to the document it is a view materialization scheme. In fact it is worse, as the resulting document is (original content + materialized views + view specifications). * PIDL does not seem to allow transmission of the materialized view only (minus the original contents), something I would expect to be best suited for thin clients. The argument that sending fat pages (content+union-of-all-views) makes multicasting more efficient, is true, but the scheme comes with other warts. Seems to me that PIDL is dictating a policy on content clustering which is not univresally advantageous. Instead, it could be policy neutral and provide mechanisms for a processing agent to either cluster the materialized views with the original content (or not). * PIDL seems to allow each user to view every other user's view specification (no access control). This could be problemmatic in a corporate environment, e.g. Do I really want marketing to know what I am NOT looking at? * PIDL does not make a strong case for its existence once XQL is in place. If it is an interim step waiting for XQL, why not inlcude this as a sub-activity of XQL to avoid standards fragmentation. While DOM may have its drawbacks, the other possibility would be to include sort and filter primitives in the DOM API. * Not sure I see the need for a comparison between PIDL and RDF. PIDL is a view specification, RDF is about page semantics. What's the connection? - --------------FA296FC17088169A43815F7B Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> <br>Below are our comments on the recent PIDL (Personalized Information Description Language) submission to W3C. I can be reached at venu@objs.com for any subsequent discussions or clarifications. <p>Regards, <br>Venu. <p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br>PIDL is an interesting application of database view definition technology to page personalization on the web. We have the following comments relating to the current proposal: <br> <ul> <li> PIDL is an interesting blend of view virtualization and view materialization.</li> <ul> <li> In that it stores "views as queries" it is a virtual view approach</li> <li> in that it allows agents to "process" (i.e materialize) a view, and then adds the materialized results to the document it is a view materialization scheme. In fact it is worse, as the resulting document is (original content + materialized views + view specifications).</li> </ul> <li> PIDL does not seem to allow transmission of the materialized view only (minus the original contents), something I would expect to be best suited for thin clients. The argument that sending fat pages (content+union-of-all-views) makes multicasting more efficient, is true, but the scheme comes with other warts. Seems to me that PIDL is dictating a policy on content clustering which is not univresally advantageous. Instead, it could be policy neutral and provide mechanisms for a processing agent to either cluster the materialized views with the original content (or not).</li> <li> PIDL seems to allow each user to view every other user's view specification (no access control). This could be problemmatic in a corporate environment, e.g. Do I really want marketing to know what I am NOT looking at?</li> <li> PIDL does not make a strong case for its existence once XQL is in place. If it is an interim step waiting for XQL, why not inlcude this as a sub-activity of XQL to avoid standards fragmentation. While DOM may have its drawbacks, the other possibility would be to include sort and filter primitives in the DOM API. </li> <li> Not sure I see the need for a comparison between PIDL and RDF. PIDL is a view specification, RDF is about page semantics. What's the connection?</li> </ul> <p> </html> - --------------FA296FC17088169A43815F7B-- - --------------C1DF78CD97ECF479ED5696D8 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="venu.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Venu Vasudevan Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="venu.vcf" begin:vcard n:Vasudevan;Venu tel;work:602.755.7581 x-mozilla-html:TRUE org:OBJS Consulting adr:;;1942 E.Todd Drive;Tempe;AZ;85283;USA version:2.1 email;internet:venu@objs.com x-mozilla-cpt:;4576 fn:Dr. Venu Vasudevan end:vcard - --------------C1DF78CD97ECF479ED5696D8-- ------- End of forwarded message ------- -- | Rolf Nelson (rolf@w3.org), Project Manager, W3C at MIT | "Try to learn something about everything | and everything about something." --Huxley
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 1999 09:28:38 UTC