- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: 10 Apr 2003 14:14:48 -0400
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 13:36, David Orchard wrote: > I really support this kind of work. Would it be possible to express message > parts in header fields? Imagine a use case where travel agent web services > is doing a query for flights, and the query requires an XQuery and HTTP is > used (so HTTP POST is required). There would be a username/password, > conversationID, and the xml content. Each of these parts can be bound to > different places in the message stream. The username/password is bound to > the HTTP mechanisms, the conversationID into the URI, and the XQuery into > the SOAP body. While there may a value in expressing message in header fields, I'm not sure if this example is good enough. We would be better off having an abstract feature to define a username/password mechanism that can reused across than bindings. The username/password should not be included in the message parts, but instead controlled using features/properties. Philippe
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 14:14:59 UTC