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

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

From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:08:12 -0800
Message-ID: <C3729BBB6099B344834634EC67DE4AE1348FD4@red-msg-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Right. The main constrast is between relying on a special registry of
subtypes and subpurposes of XML versus having a single, integrated system of
identifiers, namely URI.  What exactly the URI references is possible then
to work out; it could certainly be as expressive as anything that avoids
URIs.

See "Web Architecture from 50,000 feet" at
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture .

-----Original Message-----
From: Frystyk 
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 11:20 AM
To: Mark Baker; mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject: RE: text/xml for SOAP (and XP) considered harmful


Whether it is easier or not is always a difficult discussion but I agree
that
it is a useful mechanism. All I am saying is that I don't want to have to
register and maintain a token in a central registry and have to provide a
special parser case in order to do that.

Henrik

> I don't believe it only works for single namespace documents, though
> perhaps for a different definition of "works" 8-).  Being able to
> MIME-dispatch to a SOAP/XP processor by using the
> application/[xp|soap]+xml media type means never having to assume
> dispatching on XML namespaces in the XML processor.
>
> Assigning responsibility for XML namespace dispatching to an
> application
> processor (XP/SOAP in this case) is a lot easier to deploy than
> assigning it to XML processors.
Received on Tuesday, 19 December 2000 15:34:11 GMT

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