• Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (5)

1 localhost commented Permalink

Interesting - I've always thought Web Services and XML in general are too verbose for high performance leaving their value in inter-operability and loose coupling.Do you think these changes will cut into MQ's market share in middleware messaging? I know that MQ is often used as a transport for Web Services. Do you think SOAP can compete in this space?-robby.peterson@gmail.com(Computer Engineering student)

2 localhost commented Permalink

I've finally gotten around to answering this "What about MQ?" question. See Web Services Compression and Reliability.

3 localhost commented Permalink

You said that "[i]MTOM can also be used to encode an entire SOAP message in binary form, decreasing the size of the message.[/i]" . But what the MTOM and XOP spec say is [i]"The purpose of the Abstract SOAP Transmission Optimization Feature is to optimize the transmission of base64 encoded data"[/i], and more refinements about that.So what I understand from the spec is that messages like this one:[code] ... ... ... [/code][i]won't[/i] gain any optimization from XOP and MTOM. Or will they?

4 localhost commented Permalink

I expected more from a IBM forum. I advise responsibles of this site of providing both [b]automated escaping[/b] of "less-than", "greater-than" and other characters, and also a [b]preview[/b] feature. I hope now my example XML message gets published right:[code]<LongListOfCustomers> <Customer id="1"> ... </Customer> ... <Customer id="999"> ... </Customer></LongListOfCustomers>

5 localhost commented Permalink

jcamara,Yeah, I apologize for that. We try to balance allowing people to post HTML (with security restrictions of course)with supporting posts with markup like XML. Fortunately you figured out that you needed to use the code tag. I'll add preview to our feature list.Thanks!Jay

Add a Comment Add a Comment