- From: john d. beatty <jbeatty@gonesilent.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:07:12 -0700
- To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Shuo Shen" <sshen@softartisans.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Does it makes sense to have a DIME binding for SOAP with Attachments? Right now, section 5 "HTTP Binding" [1] provides for using MIME multipart but not for the application/dime media-type defined by the DIME spec [2]. The key concept of "SOAP References to Attachments" (section 3, SOAPwA spec) is still relevant and necessary in the context of DIME, but we do not have a formal specification for that yet (the tweaks necessary from the current SOAPwA spec are pretty trivial I believe). Note that SOAP-RP defines an optional HTTP-DIME-SOAP binding [3]. It would be nice to have these specs refactored such that there is a DIME binding specified for SOAP directly (outside the SOAP-RP spec) and a SOAPwA spec that is generic enough to allow for both mime multipart and dime. All this work would be predicated on people liking DIME and finding it useful. Of course, it is possible that SOAPwA using MIME multipart solves 90% of the problems out there with acceptable efficiency, at which point the motivation for using DIME, making room for it in specs, etc. is substantially reduced. john [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments#HTTPBinding [2] http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/default.htm [3] http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/soap-rp/default.html#N0750 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com> To: "Shuo Shen" <sshen@softartisans.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 4:15 PM Subject: RE: SOAP-Attachment question -> handling large attachment? > > Not to contradict what John said about SOAP with attachment, just for > the fun of it you might also want to have a look at DIME > > http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/default.htm > > Henrik > > >Specifically, we suggest about two ways: > >1. Adding a http-like Content-Disposition header to each body > >part, which will have sth like: > > > >--MIME_boundary > >Content-Type: image/tiff > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > >Content-ID: <claim061400a.tiff@claiming-it.com> > >Content-Disposition: attachment-data; name="attachment1"; > >filename="foo.tif"" > > > >so we know we can persist the following data to a file anyway > >no matter the size; > > > >2. Or adding a Content-Length or Attachment-Length header for > >each body part > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 17:07:36 UTC