W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > April 2003

RE: Protocol independence

From: Mark Baker <mbaker@idokorro.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:04:06 -0400
Message-ID: <0503561D34C63045B07F04E5B3B2BFDC152378@FRED.planetfred.internal>
To: "Geoff Arnold" <Geoff.Arnold@Sun.COM>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

> Oops - I sent this as a reply, so I got the wrong WS list.
> Repeated here for convenience....

I'll respond to this one then.

> One important question is the following: if I define a web 

Good call.  Yes, this is arguably *the* important question.

> service as a 
> service, and if one of the transports that I can use to 
> convey SOAP is 
> what is the significance of *how* I use HTTP to convey SOAP? 
> Do I want 
> the
> semantics of SOAP-over-HTTP to be the same as SOAP-over-MOM? If not,
> why not? If so, my application semantics must be defined 
> purely at SOAP
> and above, and the precise HTTP mapping is relevant only for 
> interoperability;
> it must be semantically neutral.
> This feels trivially obvious, so either I'm wasting your time or I'm 
> missing something.....

Does it mean the same thing to transfer a file over HTTP PUT, as it
does to transfer it over HTTP POST, or NFS WRITE?  No.

Does it mean the same thing to send 'getStockQuote("sunw")' over
BEEP, TCP, IIOP, or MOM?  Yes, it does.

The difference is that NFS and HTTP are application protocols, and
BEEP, TCP, IIOP, and MOM are not.

Received on Monday, 7 April 2003 22:04:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:06 UTC