I think that is a bit unfair on W3C. There is no DOM-only limitation in XMLSIG, for example, and there are vendors with compliant non- DOM implementations.
Of course, SAX-like streams degenerate into in-memory objects in many cases, so your assessment of "you kidding me?" seems correct. On the other hand, if we cared enough about performance, we wouldn't use XML at all. :) > -----Original Message----- > From: Davanum Srinivas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:55 AM > To: Yves Langisch > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Signing huge SOAP requests > > > You kidding me? that's huge!. problem is that the whole thing > needs to be in DOM as xml-security (AND the w3c specs) works > on DOM and not streaming/sax stuff. > > -- dims > > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:27:50 +0100, Yves Langisch > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > All, > > > > Is there anyone having experiences (memory requirements, > performance, > > ...) with signing huge SOAP requests (w/o attachments, body > is about > > 100MB) with WSS4J? > > > > Thanks > > Yves > > > > > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ >
