Re: [mmox] Automatic generation of the schema

Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com> Thu, 26 February 2009 18:52 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZM7RO10vNwRtJKLMIykiR7EQXzc/d0ZLCm6OO6GOsRvm4M6SvAPUsI/JVFZQLdamib ZvI+RerP2arhtkuL4KZF9iW+vxR8PuLLQz+Szoe9/P6SJvi3fTkRbf2ekCCCj/CntPEW oEskYlqSCDQZ6KViQlffxy72MYyPQPdxorUv8=
Message-ID: <49A6E515.6010107@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:53:09 -0800
From: Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Catherine Pfeffer <cathypfeffer@gmail.com>
References: <ebe4d1860902260410n5e19fao96b2c5f71b7bd890@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ebe4d1860902260410n5e19fao96b2c5f71b7bd890@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mmox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mmox] Automatic generation of the schema
Precedence: list

Catherine Pfeffer wrote:
> Of course, all these efforts make sense only if there is a real need 
> for XML stuff.

I believe that for non-real-time, transaction-type requests, XML is the 
right choice. If I need to "get a description of the upcoming event X" 
then that's a very good mapping to existing web 2.0 standards, which 
want XML or JSON for the response. Whether the request is an XML encoded 
entity (a la XML-RPC and SOAP), or a url-encoded query string, may still 
be under debate. Personally, I'd prefer XML-RPC.

Similarly, for durable storage, I would prefer XML to binary, because it 
is much more likely to survive for longer, be more robust, and you can 
use standard tools when processing it off-line.

Sincerely,

jw

[mmox] Automatic generation of the schema Catherine Pfeffer
Re: [mmox] Automatic generation of the schema Jon Watte