- From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@HPL.HP.COM>
- Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:50:43 -0800
- To: "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
At 04:42 PM 2/5/2003 -0800, Jeffrey Schlimmer wrote: [snip] > > As far as the SOAP spec is concerned, all that stuff is extension > > features. In the case of attachments, there should be features >describing > > their processing, and relating it if necessary to the SOAP processing > > model. > >If attachment "features" annotate the Envelope Infoset, then the >processing of those "features" can leverage the SOAP processing model >and compose well with other "features". Great! > >If they do not, then someone needs to define how they address the same >issues that the SOAP processing model does. Not to mention the >engineering effort, introducing a new processing model raises the real >risk that the new "feature" won't compose with independently-developed >"features". I am hoping that someone will reinterpret this discussion for me. I just cannot understand how attachments need work along these lines. By their very nature "attachments" attach to or are secondary to a center or primary entity, in this case the SOAP envelope. The SOAP XML refers to these attachments and determines their processing. That's it. The SOAP processing model is the processing model. What is broken here that needs to be fixed? Moreover it seems that some of this discussion concerns the potential for enabling attachment packaging transformation. That is, by making some identification between a concrete packaging specification and an abstract data model (infoset), the big gain is a straight-forward model for converting one package type into another. That is we could convert a Base64 package into a SwA or DIME package or vice versa. Is that what the infoset stuff would allow? If so, then why is that desirable? The central problem to be solved by the AFTF is standardization of the packaging scheme. Introducing transformations means one has to develop content negotiation to interoperate: is that what you want? Sorry if my questions are too far behind the discussion. ______________________________________________________ John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2003 13:25:58 UTC