- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 16:59:17 -0400
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 12:29:27PM -0700, David Orchard wrote: > I find this message fairly irregular. Mark does not speak for the TAG and > the TAG has not even proposed a finding on the relationship between SOAP > 1.2, web architecture, and HTTP. Let me say again, the body that owns the > web architecture has issued no finding that supports Mark's proposals. The > TAG has certainly not said things like RPC is not web-friendly. In fact, I > am personally examining RPC as part of TAG work. David, Respectfully, the TAG does not "own" Web architecture. The TAG's job is to document it, not define it. Also, you are incorrect when you say that the TAG has issued no finding that supports my claims; they have issued one finding[1] which includes the statement "All important resources should be identifiable by URI.". The examples in section 2.4 of the use cases don't use a URI to identify the stock, they use a parameter in a SOAP envelope. [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/01-uriMediaType-9 MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2002 16:51:57 UTC