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

Re: A tale of two bindings

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:02:06 -0400
Message-ID: <3B5C3C6E.C7FC7331@zolera.com>
To: mark.baker@sympatico.ca
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
The list of differences is completely ridiculous.  I can write
tunnelling-oriented SOAP right now, and the only difference between what
I use and your "application semantic" binding is whether faults come
back using 500 or 200.

> (**) A tunnel binding only requires a single bit of SOAP-identifying
> information on an inbound message in order to unambigously identify
> to a receiving implementation that a tunnel needs to be established.

Not at all.  It could be completely up to the local server
configuration.  I could write all my web services as CGI scripts and
nobody would know.
	/r$

-- 
Zolera Systems, Your Key to Online Integrity
Securing Web services: XML, SOAP, Signatures, Encryption
http://www.zolera.com
Received on Monday, 23 July 2001 11:00:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:02 GMT