W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2000

RE: text/xml for SOAP (and XP) considered harmful

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 10:22:36 -0800
To: "Larry Cable" <larry.cable@sun.com>
Cc: <mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBKEBDLFENBJCGFOIJCEACEAAA.LMM@acm.org>
> Larry Masinter wrote:
> 
> > Actually, SOAP should use
> >    application/soap+xml
> 
> why not just application/soap or application/xp ???
> 
> what's in a name?

Well, MIME media types are not just 'names', they're specifically
used to invoke different kinds of processing

From

http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-murata-xml-09.txt

section 7:


   XML generic processing is not always appropriate for XML-based media
   types. For example, authors of some such media types may wish that
   the types remain entirely opaque except to applications that are
   specifically designed to deal with that media type. By NOT following
   the naming convention '+xml', such media types can avoid XML-generic
   processing. Since generic processing will be useful in many cases,
   however -- including in some situations that are difficult to
   predict ahead of time -- those registering media types SHOULD use
   the '+xml' convention unless they have a particularly compelling
   reason not to.

So the question is whether it is desirable that intermediaries
might intercept and process SOAP messages using XML-generic
processing. If it is, then application/xp+xml or application/soap+xml
is appropriate. If not, then application/xp is appropriate. In neither
case is application/xml or text/xml appropriate.

Larry
-- 
http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2000 13:23:51 GMT

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