W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2004

Re: Indicating element nodes that must be optimized with XOP

From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:51:06 +0200
To: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Cc: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, Herve Ruellan <herve.ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040602105106.GH620@w3.org>
* Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com> [2004-06-01 18:38-0700]
> IMO the required / optional aspect needs to be driven by, whether is the 
> optimization feature itself is required or optional.
> At the element level all we need is a flag that indicates, if the 
> serialization is optimized then the elements tagged are to be part of it 
> (from the server perspective). Need to specify this @ only when true. 
> False is default when this flag is not present on an element.

This is a good point. Requiring optimization of an element node only
makes sense when the use of a feature providing XOP-packaging is

> As an aside putting this flag on element definition (and not at the 
> binding level) is perhaps not great, but I am not sure the alternatives 
> would be simple.

We could indeed imagine a use case where a provider provides two
bindings with XOP support for the same service, and that each of those
bindings have different characteristics and therefore requirements.

One way we could approach this would be to have a xop:optimize element
under binding, which references to the elements to be optimized:

      <element ref="id_of_element1_to_be_optimized" hint="required" />
      <element ref="id_of_element2_to_be_optimized" hint="recommended" />



Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2004 06:58:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:41 UTC