axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Sosnoski <...@sosnoski.com>
Subject Re: Doc-Style Web Clients
Date Fri, 26 Mar 2004 20:54:41 GMT
I'm aware of MTOM, and I like the idea of being able to include items 
within the infoset when appropriate. I think it'll be a mistake if all 
attachments are forced into this model, though. Besides, by the time 
it's actually agreed on Microsoft is likely to have another proposal 
that has become their new preferred approach (as with SwA, then DIME, 
now MTOM).

As for Microsoft not supporting SwA, I agree that non-support of a 
particular feature doesn't break WS-I compatibility when multiple 
alternatives are allowed (we've discussed this on the jax-rpc list from 
similar points of view). If that feature is the only alternative allowed 
by a profile, though, it becomes meaningless to say you're compliant 
(new headline: "Microsoft Word 95 Now WS-I BP 1.0a Compliant").

If Microsoft doesn't support the WS-I Attachments Profile it's going to 
make a joke of the whole WS-I process, and by extension of the whole 
idea of interoperable web services. The WS-I should just kill the 
profile if they don't have a committment from Microsoft to support it.

  - Dennis

Anne Thomas Manes wrote:

>I do believe it's possible that Microsoft may choose to not support SwA. 
>They don't support RPC/Literal either. Technically, non-support of a 
>feature defined in WS-I doesn't break "compatibility". WS-I doesn't test 
>for compatibility of tools, only compatibility of clients and services.
>
>MTOM is based on an idea created by Don Box. It really is a much better way 
>of dealing with binary data.
>
>MTOM is the emerging W3C standard model for passing binary data with SOAP 
>messages. Notice that I don't call it an "attachment model" -- that's 
>because MTOM doesn't use attachments. In MTOM, the binary data is included 
>in the SOAP infoset -- although on the wire the binary data is actually 
>sent using MIME multipart/related.
>
>See 
>http://www.burtongroup.com/weblogs/annethomasmanes/archives/2004/03/000184.html 
>for more information.
>
>Anne
>
>At 04:06 PM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
>  
>
>>Microsoft roadmaps have never struck me as being especially accurate (even 
>>the retrospective ones). Unless there's a total change in direction WS-I 
>>Attachments is going to use SwA (you can download the latest working group 
>>draft from the home page at http://www.ws-i.org/). Is there reason to 
>>believe that Microsoft is going to break compatibility with WS-I on this?
>>
>>I've assumed that part of the reason for WS-I Attachments taking so long 
>>to be released is that Microsoft doesn't want it out until they have SwA 
>>support available.
>>
>> - Dennis
>>
>>Chris Haddad wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi all -
>>>today, DIME is required for .NET interoperability when sending 
>>>attachments.   Axis does support DIME.
>>>
>>>and yes, MSFT is dropping support for DIME in the future.  it is being 
>>>superseded by MTOM in their roadmap: 
>>>http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnglobspec/html/wsmsgspecindex.asp
>>>
>>>/Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>>>From: "Olejarz, Greg" <Greg.Olejarz@Monster.com>
>>>Reply-To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
>>>Date:  Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:21:38 -0500
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Not sure if Microsoft will drop support for DIME but
>>>>DIME does not appear to be part of the WS-I attachments
>>>>work.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Since Microsoft seems committed to WS-I, I would think
>>>>whatever ends up in that document will at least be
>>>>added to the next release.
>>>>
>>>>Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Anderson Jonathan [mailto:anderson_jonathan@bah.com]
>>>>Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 10:58 AM
>>>>To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
>>>>Subject: RE: Doc-Style Web Clients
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I heard grumblings awhile ago that Microsoft might be dropping support for
>>>>DIME in lieu of some WS-I discussions concerning attachments.  Might wanna
>>>>try googling around for more information, but this probably won't occur
>>>>until the next .Net/Vis Studio release anyway.
>>>>
>>>>        -Jon
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Thomas.Duehrsen@bedag.ch [mailto:Thomas.Duehrsen@bedag.ch]
>>>>Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 8:12 AM
>>>>To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
>>>>Subject: AW: Doc-Style Web Clients
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>How about passing the whole document as a single string parameter of a
>>>>doc/literal web service? Is there a  better performance to expect when using
>>>>SAAJ?
>>>>
>>>>What i don't like about SAAJ: .NET requires the use of DIME format. I don't
>>>>know all platforms or toolkits used to develop the potential clients and so
>>>>i don't know if DIME is supported by them. The first time i heard of DIME
>>>>was when i was looking into SAAJ. Is DIME widly supported?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>
>>>>Thomas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Anne Thomas Manes
>VP & Research Director
>Burton Group 
>
>  
>

-- 
Dennis M. Sosnoski
Enterprise Java, XML, and Web Services
Training and Consulting
http://www.sosnoski.com
Redmond, WA  425.885.7197



Mime
View raw message