- 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