- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:21:44 -0500
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
- Message-id: <56336ECC-1976-11D8-96AF-0003937568DC@sun.com>
On 17 Nov 2003, at 21:07, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > >> To allay your first concern, I'd be open to >> recommending that the binding check for differences >> during serialization. Computing a low cost hash during >> serialization wouldn't add much overhead I suspect. > <snip/> > I'm not saying this > is necessarily impractical, I'm saying that it's far > from obvious that the impacts are negligble, especially > given that part of the reason for MTOM is to deal > efficiently with very large amounts of data. > > Also: isn't the point of using the IDs exactly so that > you don't have to check the contents? Whatever the > other merits of using the same MIME part for two or > more bits of identical content, if you're going to > check the content anyway, wouldn't it make some sense > to skip the IDs? > You were concerned about losing info so I offered the possibility of checking for equality. I can imagine better ways of ensuring equality, e.g. only a single instance of the multi-referenced data in memory and multiple pointers to that with a copy-on-write scheme but then you're getting into implementation details. Recommending an equality check in the abstract would not prevent such optimizations. >> I agree that UUID/GUIDs may not be usable in every >> environment but note that RFC 2111 requires that "the >> Content-ID of a MIME body part is required to be >> globally unique" so the problem exists independent of >> MTOM usage. Simply reusing the content-id of the part >> as the attribute value would suffice for MTOM >> multi-reference support. > > If I understand what you're saying, that would put > the CID URI in both the hint attribute and also > in the xbinc:include? Seems sort of strange. > Maybe I'm misunderstanding. > No, you're right - in my example I had a comment noting that depending on the semantics of the hint attribute the xbinc:Include/@href might be redundant. > Thank you for your patience with my concerns! > No problem, I think its important that we explore all the implications of each choice. Marc. -- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com> Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Monday, 17 November 2003 22:21:48 UTC