- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 17:27:32 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- cc: <jones@research.att.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Jean-Jacques,
Just to clarify my thinking:
I really think that from the point of view of the Body - the
flesh of the message - all the data in headers are just
meta-data. Especially those data targeted at intermediaries.
Yes, from the point of view of the intermediary a header will
have the data, but then this header can be viewed as a
sub-request of the whole request (or sub-message of the whole
message if you will) and the header data are the data for this
sub-request and all the rest of the message, including Body, is
meta-data to that sub-request.
By data I mean information directly connected to the requested
action, by meta-data I mean information connected only
indirectly. This definition may vary and that may be the reason
why it might seem we disagree.
Regards
Jacek Kopecky
Idoox
http://www.idoox.com/
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
>
> > [...] In SOAP you first have the natural distinction of metadata
> > and data (headers and body), then you add [...]
>
> This is were I think we disagree. IMHO, headers can carry carry data, not just
> metadata. In fact, intermediaries require that you use headers for data, as
> the body cannot be used to target data at a particular intermediary (remember
> the body is being targeted at the ultimate recipient only).
>
> > Let's keep SOAP simple - and that not in the mathematical sense
> > of small and flexible, rather in the sense of easy to grasp and
> > flexible.
>
> Hum... are the two approaches really antinomial?
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
>
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2001 11:27:42 UTC