W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > June 2002

Dan Connolly's GET comment

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 23:17:02 -0400
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020627231702.D11776@www.markbaker.ca>

I heard Chris refer to a comment Dan Connolly had made on the usage
scenarios.  I checked www-wsa-comments and found two comments including
this one on GET;

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-wsa-comments/2002Jun/0003

I concur with Dan, as I previously said basically the same thing;

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0009

Although I went further and also said that any method name in a POST
body is unnecessary.

I should point out that my previous suggestion to identify the need for
a use of GET with SOAP, was also a comment that the TAG made to the XML
Protocol WG, and resulted in the "Web Method Specification Feature"
being created in SOAP 1.2.  I would be happy with replacing any get-
style examples that we show, with HTTP GET instead of SOAP over HTTP
POST.  But that doesn't resolve my other issues about PUT and about
how subscription could be done in a Web architecture friendly manner.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 27 June 2002 23:06:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:01 GMT