RE: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support

On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 01:59, Jeff Mischkinsky wrote:
>2) Is this a principle reason why SOAP 1.1 support would not be
included in
> >WSDL 2.0?
> 
> I have no idea. That's why I asked the question, having been sensitized 
> over the last 2 years to IPR issues that seem to lurk in the impenetrable 
> web services thickets. I don't even know if it would be an impediment, 
> principal, or otherwise. (And yes, i suppose you could argue that I am 
> standing on principle. :-)

As a point of information, while SOAP 1.1 is not normatively referenced
by the WSDL 2.0 documents, I'm aware of at least one other document on
the W3C Recommendation Track that links SOAP 1.1 normatively:
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xkms2-20030418/

Regarding the licensing terms around SOAP 1.1, I would note that some of
the companies who submitted SOAP 1.1 are also members of the WSDL 2.0
and therefore bound by their statements around WSDL 2.0, if the
technology is necessary to implement the SOAP 1.1 binding of WSDL 2.0.
This includes HP/Compaq, IBM/Lotus, IONA, SAP, and Microsoft. Others
(Ariba, DevelopMentor, and UserLand Software) already committed to
royalty-free if included in a W3C Recommendation, with the exception of
one (Commerce One).

Philippe