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

RE: SOAP 1.2 Part 0: Primer Editor's draft available for review

From: Nilo Mitra (EMX) <Nilo.Mitra@am1.ericsson.se>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 08:58:46 -0600
Message-ID: <C358DED30DFED41192E100508BB392278C3A6A@eamrcnt716.exu.ericsson.se>
To: "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Agreed. Will do.
Thx
Nilo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:30 AM
> To: Nilo Mitra (EMX)
> Cc: 'xml-dist-app@w3.org'
> Subject: Re: SOAP 1.2 Part 0: Primer Editor's draft available 
> for review
> 
> 
> Nilo,
> 
> There is no dispute here, I think you're right showing an example
> other than (the usal (boring)) RPC. I am simply suggesting that,
> in your text, you indicate this could also be done with RPC, but
> that there is no real need here, so that the people who know SOAP
> only through RPC understand there are other valid usage patterns.
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> "Nilo Mitra (EMX)" wrote:
> 
> >         * In the same example, be more explicit as well about
> >      why you choose
> >           not to use RPC.
> >      NM: Don't know if this was a real design choice. It was
> >      based on the need to meet a comment on the previous draft
> >      that the examples not be too RPC-ish. I thought this was a
> >      part of a plausible document exchange oriented scenario
> >      which could be built upon throughout the document.
> >
> 
Received on Monday, 3 December 2001 09:59:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 22:28:13 UTC