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

Re: MIME marking for SOAP and XP (was text/xml for SOAP (and XP) con sidered harmful)

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:35:53 -0800
To: Mark Baker <mark.baker@canada.sun.com>
Cc: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org, mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp
Message-ID: <20010103183551.B13153@akamai.com>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:05:03PM -0500, Mark Baker wrote:
> > 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.
> Right.  I believe that we should try to ensure HTTP-only intermediaries
> can participate in an XP (or SOAP) processor route (or at least not foul
> it up).  Hmm, sounds like a new requirement to me;
> "XP should ensure that using non-XP-aware application level
> intermediaries in a chain of XP processors (e.g. an HTTP-only proxy
> between XP-over-HTTP intermediaries), should not interfere with the
> end-to-end contract of that chain."

R803 implies the ability to interpose a non-processing intermediary
with no ill effect (i.e., the message will be opaque to the

  XML Protocol must not preclude the use of transport bindings that
  define transport intermediary roles such as store-and-forward,
  proxy and gateway.

Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA)
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2001 21:35:57 UTC

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