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

Re: Binding example discussion

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:20:37 -0700
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>, XML Distributed Applications List <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20010718112027.D23653@akamai.com>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 01:52:12PM -0400, Mark Baker wrote:
> There is one issue on this topic that may require some work on our
> part though; supporting an HTTP 203 (Accepted) response code. 
> Should a SOAP message be POSTed over HTTP and the server responds
> with a 203, the correlation between request and response has now
> been broken.  Do we want/need to say anything about how an
> application can determine correlation when the response is returned
> through some other means?  At a minimum I think we should say that
> other mechanisms can be used on top of SOAP (say, a transaction
> header block), but that the HTTP binding does not define such a
> mechanism.

Agreed. This caveat might be appropriate in the binding definition
itself, or in a general binding discussion.

Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2001 14:20:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:14 UTC