- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 15:30:51 +0200
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Noah, I think this might be useful, but if it opens too many questionable cases, I'd be happy to disallow this in our serialization spec. In any case, I don't think the abstract feature needs to be aware of this. I know you didn't even mention the abstract feature in your text. Best regards Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect Systinet Corporation http://www.systinet.com/ On Sat, 2003-09-27 at 02:31, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > > > > Jacek and I had some private discussion of this over the summer, but I'm > not sure whether it ever resulted in any public consideration by the WG: > > It occurs to me that in certain use cases the identical large binary might > logically serve as content to multiple leaf nodes. This could in principle > be done by reference to headers, but that changes the vocabularies and is > not in all cases natural. I wonder whether we should allow a smart MTOM > implementation to point multiple xbinc:Includes to the same mime part (I.e. > use the same URI)? Seems like a win to me, and I can quite easily imagine > implementations that would know from the construction of the DOM or similar > structure that the content was identical. > > In any case, I think we should open an issue to make clear what the rule > is, even if we just clarify that you must not link a given mtom part from > more than (or perhaps less than?) a single xbinc:Include. My current > leaning would be to allow flexibility in both directions. Multiple > xbinc:Includes should be able to ref the same content, and it should be > possible to carry content that is not referenced at all (e.g. to avoid the > need for reference counting, or to maintain certain kinds of signatures, > even if a header with a reference is removed.) That said, I wouldn't > expect many implementations to avail themselves of the permission to send > large useless content, but I think the sharing makes sense. > > New issue? > > Thanks. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2003 09:30:53 UTC