RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][R602]

[Eilon Reshef <eilon.reshef@webcollage.com>]

Title: Message

I'll put my 1.5 cents into this discussion, even though I didn't originally put my name for it :-)

 

I think that it more than makes sense that we shouldn't ask the Consumer to parse and modify Flash content, Java applets, or any other binary format.

 

The question in my mind (regarding the actual intent of this requirement) is: should the WSIA protocol *permit* some sequence of calls in which a WSIA Web Service that contains Flash/Java/ActiveX with links or forms would still work, even though it has user interaction, and even though "smart look-and-feel customization" (whatever this is) will not be offered.

 

This point - although seemingly minor - may have significant implications on the actual protocol with regards to action routing.

 

If we do decide that binary formats should be supported even at a basic level, then (at least according to my possibly limited understanding) this means that we must provide at least some way (not necessarily the "mainstream" way) for the Consumer to provide enough information to the Producer (who serves the binary data) so that the binary content is served in such a way in which all the actions are routed correctly to the Consumer. This means that the Producer has to take care of it, but it would make it doable.

 

We at WebCollage have encountered some cases where people used Flash for parts of their applications, so it made sense for us to consider it. However, we need to decide whether this is something that the WSIA committee as a whole cares about. 

 

Eilon

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Kropp [mailto:akropp@epicentric.com]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:41 PM
To: 'wsia@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: [wsia][wsia-requirements][R602]

R602 [Flexibility]
                This specification should support common Presentation
Formats, which are in use today in Net-enabled applications. In particular,
it should support HTML, XHTML, WML and XML as Presentation Formats. It must
not preclude the use of other presentation formats (Eilon: such as Flash,
GIFs, etc.). Debate on last sentence: AK, CW.

I think only XML and HTML (due to its ubiquity) markups should be supported
by name, other formats should be considered opaque in the markup stream.
Last sentence should read:  

 It must not preclude the use of other presentation formats, although these
(e.g., Flash, GIFs, etc.) shall be considered opaque in the markup stream.

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>