Re: Proposal for resolving issue 40: Support resource constrained devices

Jacek Kopecky writes:

>> IMO the scenario S21 is perfectly doable once 
>> we assert (as IIRC we have decided to do) 
>> that the headers are relatively small and
>> that the body is the biggie.

+1 insofar as streaming is known to more important for bodies in general. 

That said, I'm not sure we've done a particularly good job characterizing 
the requirements for resource constrained devices.  Many such devices will 
either (a) receive small messages (b) have the horsepower to quickly 
receive and do random access to moderately larger messages.  One can 
certainly imagine scenarios (incremental rendering of JPEGs, playing 
music) where it's important to do streaming, though for many of these 
streaming of the body indeed seems to be what you need.  Bottom line: I 
think we need to do a better job of identifying the real requirements of 
various small device usage scenarios before we go too far out of our way 
on design issues. 

Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Received on Thursday, 15 November 2001 14:29:11 UTC