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

Re: RPCTF: Should RPC be core or an extension ?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:25:14 -0700
To: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: John Ibbotson <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010725092509.B1926@mnot.net>


+1 with this view - it very much needs the separation (as others have
illustrated), but it doesn't *necessarily* need to be evident in the
message... I think! ;)


On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 04:55:19PM +0100, Marc Hadley wrote:
> +1 for John's proposal. I think I'd prefer to replace "architected
> extension" with "a set of rules/conventions" to prevent confusion with
> SOAP header extensions which I don't think really play a part in the RPC
> conventions and encoding rules.
> 
> Marc.
> 
> John Ibbotson wrote:
> > 
> > Should RPC be part of the core SOAP specification or an architected
> > extension ?
> > 
> > I believe the SOAP 1.1 specification confused matters by including sections
> > on RPC and encoding. Readers of the specification came to the incorrect
> > conclusion that SOAP was inextricably linked to RPC. As Henrik pointed out
> > inthe early days of the WG, SOAP is really only a single way message with
> > RPC being a convention for linking two single way messages into a
> > request/response pair together with an encoding mechanism. By removing  RPC
> > from the core specification and placing it into a separate extension, we
> > have the opportunity to correct the confusion that I believe originates
> > from SOAP 1.1.
> > 
> > There is a second reason for removing RPC from the core specification.
> > There is a large body of users (the EDI community via ebXML) for whom RPC
> > is not the preferred invocation mechanism. They operate with a document
> > exchange model which may include boxcarring of business documents in a
> > single message each of which is of equal processing importance. If the WG
> > perpetuates the perceived importance of RPC by including it in the core
> > specification rather than viewing it as an extension, then acceptance of
> > SOAP in some communities may be diminished.
> > 
> > Comments please,
> > John
> > 
> > XML Technology and Messaging,
> > IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park,
> > Winchester, SO21 2JN
> > 
> > Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188        (home) +44 (0)1722 781271
> > Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898
> > Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM
> > email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
> 
> --
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
> Tel: +44 1252 423740
> Int: x23740
> 

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
 
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2001 12:25:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT