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

Re: SOAP IANA considerations

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:52:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200112061652.LAA09265@markbaker.ca>
To: chris.ferris@sun.com (Christopher Ferris)
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org

> There was some discussion, I believe initiated by
> Henrik, that we could have SOAPAction replaced by
> a (OPTIONAL?) parameter on the application/soap(+xml)
> media type MIME header.

Right, the media type registration would include this optional
parameter.  But we haven't yet considered the implications of removing
SOAPAction, specifically security implications.  It's not as simple as
deferring to the parameter, unless we want to mandate that SOAP messages
MUST only be described with this media type, not application/xml.

> If we intend to pursue the SOAPAction HTTP header
> registration, I would strongly recommend a separate
> ID as it has nothing to do with the media type
> registration and is only applicable to HTTP.

They are all items that should be registered with IANA as a result of
the work we're doing in the WG.  I think that's as good a reason as
any to keep them together.  It also isn't intended to suggest that any
additional IANA registrations have to be done as an update to that
document, if you were concerned about that.

Practically, there's also less administrative overhead in doing it in
one draft (for both us and the IETF), though at the cost of proceeding
at the publication speed of the slowest piece (probably the media type
in this case).

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 11:53:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:17 UTC