Re: Compression (was RE: COMPLEXITY BIG ISSUE)

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com>]

At 10:06 AM 3/9/00 -0500, David RR Webber wrote:


>Matt,
>
>Separation of layers is very important.   Remember that the transport can
>encrpyt/decrypt/compress/expand in the hardware - this is what modems
>do well.  Therefore you only ever see plain text in your ebXML applications
>-
>but over the wire smart things happen.  Also notice that this does not
>impose
>system impacts as the subsystem is handling the on the wire stuff.
>
>This is the best model for ebXML - the hardware/transport layer can use
>whatever.   When we tried to dip down into this with EDI it caused
>boundless
>pain.  The hardware companies have their own standards for all this - no
>need for us to go there.

So you are saying "Forget transport, focus on the transaction minus 
delivery?".  I actually feel that way as well, but is there not a whole 
committee devoted to transport, and wouldn't they need to make some 
decisions about this?

I like the BizTalk model, which is transport agnostic (assuming a handler 
is provided for what you are trying to do), but I am guessing that most of 
the actual B2B transport is going to happen on one medium, with others 
being spawned as a result of the main transaction.  I also am hoping that 
transport is no longer up to the hardware guys, what with TCP/IP and all - 
I really hope we aren't doing too much more modem-based communication.

--
Matthew MacKenzie
--
Matthew MacKenzie
CTO/VP R&D
XML Global Technologies, Inc.