W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > October 2003

Re: http binding

From: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@zandar.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 12:19:38 -0000
Message-ID: <001f01c39e16$ecd7a350$1800a8c0@BERYOZKIN>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <paul.downey@bt.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hello,

> No, I wasn't going as far as saying the same operation has
> multiple bindings (actually we don't support that within
> a single binding) - just that some operations may want GET
> and others POST.

Would it be possible to use an optional attribute on SOAP Http Binding for a
SOAP Request-Response MEP ? Such an attribute could state that a given
operation wants to use GET instead of POST. Perhaps, there also should be an
agorithm which would URL encode (like the way shown in SOAP primer) query
parameters to make this given URL unique, otherwise, it's not clear what
benefit would GET requests on a single handler URL bring.
If all the above were possible than one issue is that GET and headers are
not friends at the moment. So, may be these 2 approaches can help :
1. Just tunnel GET over POST when headers are required, similar to the way
suggested at [1]
2. Use GET with headers [2]

Approach 2 may help in having a single HTTP binding which would suit all
uses, for SOAP and not for SOAP

I may be out of sync with what is being discussed here, apologies if so
Thanks
Sergey Beryozkin




[1] http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/DifferentlyAbledClients
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Jan/thread.html#416
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 07:41:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:27 GMT