W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > August 2001

RE: SOAP and the Web architecture

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:37:30 -0700
To: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBKEBDLFENBJCGFOIJKEGCFIAA.LMM@acm.org>
# The gist of the problem is that the current HTTP binding uses
# HTTP POST requests.

The appropriateness of using POST for arbitrary activities
is a debate that has happened at great length in a number
of other fora: the WebDAV group debated this at length
before settling on alternative methods for WebDAV actions
[RFC 2518], while the IPP group debated it at length before
settling on using POST for the Internet Print Protocol [RFC 2910].

Most of the arguments are on archived mailing lists... just
a little searching will turn them up, e.g.:

http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/draft-cohen-http-ext-postal-00.txt
http://www.globecom.net/ietf/draft/draft-debry-http-usepost-00.html
http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/paloalto/minutes.html
http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/feb98/0238.html
http://www.pwg.org/hypermail/ipp/0092.html
and, for that matter, RFC 2324 section 2.1.1.

You can save time by referencing the old arguments rather than
reinventing them. I don't think that the text you quoted in
RFC 2616 is normative, and you quoted it out of context. And
besides, the use of POST for form submission (a common usage
of POST) is clearly outside the scope of "accept the entity
as a new subordinate".

Larry
-- 
http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Saturday, 25 August 2001 01:39:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT