Re: [wsrp-webservice] call

[Rich Thompson <richt2@us.ibm.com>]

Not entirely sure what you are saying;
in particular, what is the significance of the ultimate consumer of the
markup being a browser?

The design reasons stated for carrying
data outside the SOAP message, but within the overall transport message
might not be exactly the WSRP case, but we certainly have equivalent concerns.
If you are referring to their rejection of a request to consider referencing
an external streaming media resource, I would just say that I can see why
they would not want to focus on this for the first version. The overall
design of referring to things via absolute URIs does leave open the possibility
of such references in the future without burdening the WG with what additional
info must be provided for such resources.

Rich

Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>

11/13/2003 09:43 AM

To	wsrp-webservice@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject	Re: [wsrp-webservice] call

Most of the use cases in this doc require the data to be carried within
the message for design reasons.

"For design reasons, this data cannot be referenced externally, but
must 
be transported with the message"

Since the ultimate consumer of markup is typically a browser, IMO, these
use cases do not address the need to transport markup such that it can
be streamed efficiently by a Consumer or a Producer.

Any comments?

Regards,

Subbu


Andre Kramer said the following on 11/13/2003 05:18 AM:
> W3C just published a work9ing draft on requirements for SOAP optimized
> serialization: http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-soap12-os-ucr-20031112/
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* Andre Kramer [mailto:andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com]
>     *Sent:* 12 November 2003 15:42
>     *To:* wsrp-webservice@lists.oasis-open.org
>     *Subject:* [wsrp-webservice] call
> 
>     Calling in: Rich, Richard, Andre
> 
>     - discussed status of attachments work for 1.1.
>             - We now have some data
on gains to expect from use of
>     attachments and an opportunity to test both SwA and
DIME mechanisms.
>     However, standardization & best practice lags, and
the group felt
>     that we should be following behind others. In particular,
we should
>     await type safe (wsdl) means to specify attachments.
Likely to be
>     post 1.1.
> 
>             - new proposals seem to
be leaning towards an abstract model
>     for attaching non-DOM data to an Infoset and we should
explore which
>     of our protocol elements could benefit. Action: Andre
to identify
>     candidates for next call.
> 
>     - we discussed Richard's proposal to publish a non-normative
.xsd
>     (XML Schema) file on our TC Web Site. This would contain
StringArray
>     and NamedStringArray types and elements (unfortunately
we can't
>     selectively import the types form the existing schema
for re-use?)
>     but defined in another namespace. We would not import
this extra
>     schema into our wsdl but would expect specific consumers
and
>     producers to do so (for multi-valued JSR 168 string
property, for
>     example).
> 
>     Action: Andre to raise in tomorrow's TC call.
> 
>             -- Andre
> 



To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-webservice/members/leave_workgroup.php.