[Standards] Best approach for Shared XML editing

Boyd Fletcher boyd.fletcher at jfcom.mil
Thu Sep 11 18:05:49 CDT 2008


comments below.

On 9/11/08 3:32 PM, "Dave Cridland" <dave at cridland.net> wrote:

> On Thu Sep 11 19:30:24 2008, Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL
> J9935 wrote:
>> I think the key thing to note is that while at a basic level
>> whiteboarding can be editing an xml document (ie SVG), there are
>> many additional things like page control,  cursor control/movement,
>> presentation control, pan/zoom syncing, etc.... that are well
>> beyond xml document editing.
> 
> 100% in agreement here.
> 
>>  Its for these types of  reasons that we think a custom protocol
>> for whiteboarding is required and
> 
> Beginning to lose me here - I think this could more than likely be
> done as a control protocol either in parallel or layered with an XML
> exchange protocol.

for a basic WB maybe, but now add mapping (OpenGIS WMS/WFS integration) and
complex layers, and object manipulation like cursors or thumbtacks then you
end up needing an integrated protocol where everything understands what's
going on. You also have to have a server component to deal with collisions,
history, delta changes, time based changes, and other features like access
control, IBB for image transfer, and all the presentation control stuff.


I saw Joonas's rip of RFC5261 and agree with him. its not very good for our
problem set.



> 
>>  that using an approach like sxde is only going to hamper the
>> whiteboard/presentation capabilities in the future.
> 
> Lost me - I dislike SXE, but I think the approach - build a generic
> XML sync protocol, and build whiteboarding on top - is good.
> 
> OTOH, RFC 5261 came out today. And that seems to be reasonably sane
> looking, but capable of everything that SXE can do, too.
> 
> I'd encourage both the TransVerse team and Joonas to go read it.
> 
> Dave.



More information about the Standards mailing list