W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2002

Re: SOAP breaks HTTP?

From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:41:52 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA0B2E0.D3B62242@prescod.net>
To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Christopher Ferris wrote:
> 
>...
> >>
> >
> > I get this argument often. I'll try to paraphrase it and you can correct
> > me if I misunderstand: "HTTP can be abused and often is. Therefore we
> > should introduce a specification that not only is likely to encourage
> > the abuse of HTTP, but darn near requires it." This makes no sense to
> > me.
> 
> Nonsense. This is pure sophism.

I'll repeat my challenge one more time. Can you point me to a single
public SOAP+HTTP service that adheres both to the web architecture
principles described here:

 a) http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html

and the semantics of HTTP described here:

 b) http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html

I'm just asking for a single realistic example to get the ball rolling.
We're dancing around this issue. SOAP supporters keep blaming the
developers. "It isn't SOAP, it's the people using it." I think that that
is disingenuous. If you know today that the vast majority of uses are
going to be broken, to the extent that we can't find a single one that
is not, then where does the blame really lie?

> Putting "compatibility with web architecture" aside, the issue
> is actually one of charter and scope[1]. Defining a "compact encoding"
> such as URI encoding of a SOAP message is expressly out of scope
> for the XMLP WG as originaly chartered.

That's a procedural explanation for a technical failure. But the TAG is
about the technology. To be honest I'm not nearly as interested in
understanding why the technologies do not work together as in figuring
out how they can be made to work together.

 Paul Prescod
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 12:46:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT