- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:58:01 -0400
- To: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF74730D2C.EDB24C85-ON85256D88.005C7A0A@lotus.com>
John, On the data model call a week or so ago, I took an action item to draft (with advice from you) a version of MTOM based on the Query data model. I've taken a first cut over the past day or so, and I think it looks pretty good. XML and HTML are attached. I'll try and check it into CVS after lunch. Also: I've cc:'d distApp, as I think it's worth a review by at least the DM task force, and for that matter by anyone else who's interested. For those who don't remember the context of this work, I proposed a few months ago that we explore expressing MTOM in terms of the Query data model. Among the reasons for this proposal are: * MTOM uses type information, and the Data Model is emerging as the normative W3C model for typed XML * There is some reason to hope that this formulation will facilitate the transmission of Query results through SOAP. * If investments are made, for example, in DSIG canonicalizations that work on the typed data model (e.g. using dm:typed-value as input to the c14n), then the same mechanism should apply to signing of MTOM transmissions (which seems interesting to me, as the performance of signatures is one of the major remaining concerns about MTOM, IMO.) * Although this version of MTOM doesn't do it, the extensions to turn this into an optimized facility for sending the whole data model would be straightforward. Also FYI: this formulation attempts to capture a few decisions that were made >tentatively< on the dm call. These include: * Type information is used only for optimization: it is not in any other sense conveyed for processing by the receiver. We could loosen that, but would lose the ability to run compatibly under old bindings, and would raise the question of useful information being conveyed outside the XML serializations. * We decided, for now, to handle only base64Binary. The extension to any other type(s) with canonical lexical representations is straightforward. I tried not to make substantative changes beyond the DM reformulation, but in a few cases I did. For example, I point out that we can only optimize data in the canonical form of base64Binary, and I refer to the appropriate Schema erratum (as yet not formally published, unfortunately.) Comments from all are most welcome, but after tomorrow AM I am likely to be incommunicado until about cheers. Enjoy! (See attached file: OptimizationMechanismDM.html)(See attached file: OptimizationMechanismDM.xml) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachments
- text/html attachment: OptimizationMechanismDM.html
- application/octet-stream attachment: OptimizationMechanismDM.xml
Received on Friday, 22 August 2003 00:38:14 UTC