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

RE: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2)

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:09:24 -0700
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC9013A8FA6@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "Francis McCabe" <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>, "Christopher B Ferris" <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Hao He" <Hao.He@thomson.com.au>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>, <www-ws-arch-request@w3.org>

See my previous reference to the SOAP Response MEP.

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis McCabe [mailto:fgm@fla.fujitsu.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 1:59 PM
> To: Christopher B Ferris
> Cc: Hao He; www-ws-arch@w3.org; www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2)
> 
> 
> 
> How does using GET to *send* a message fit with the semantics of GET?
> 
> Frank
> 
> On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 01:34  PM, Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> 
> >
> > Frank McCabe wrote on 06/27/2003 11:05:47 AM:
> >
> >>
> >> I would strongly suggest removing the references to using 
> HTTP GET as 
> >> a
> >> way of sending messages. Mark B is right on this one. If 
> you want to
> >> use HTTP, the appropriate verb is POST.
> >
> > Hmmm... I'm fairly certain I disagree.
> >
> >>
> >> I suggest further that the plain XML reference is not one that has 
> >> been
> >> endorsed by the group. Indeed I recall significant pushback on this
> >> one...
> >
> > +1
> >
> >>
> >> Frank
> >
> > Christopher Ferris
> > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > phone: +1 508 234 3624
> >
> >
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 27 June 2003 17:09:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:21 GMT