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

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

From: <mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:19:17 +0900 (LMT)
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Cc: mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp
Message-Id: <20001220111917I.mmurata@trl.ibm.com>
From: Mark Baker <mark.baker@canada.sun.com>
Subject: Re: text/xml for SOAP (and XP) considered harmful
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 13:20:27 -0500

> 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.

My understanding of SOAP is limited, but I am not sure if we need
specialized media types for SOAP.  I could be wrong.

MIME headers are useful for dispatching only when you have few ideas
about what you will receive.  If you already know that your SOAP/XP
processor directly receives SOAP message from another SOAP/XP
processor or a SOAP/XP proxy, MIME headers do not help dispatching.  
To the contrary, if WWW browsers may receive SOAP messages as well 
as different types of XML documents, a specialized media type for SOAP 
does help.

Another reason for introducing specialized media types is proxy
servers.  If we have a specialized media type for SOAP/XP, proxy
servers can easily take some actions for SOAP messages.  If this is
useful, we need a specialied media type for SOAP.


<warning>Speaking for himself only</warning>

IBM Tokyo Research Lab / International University of Japan, Research Institute
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)
Received on Tuesday, 19 December 2000 21:25:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:11 UTC