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

RE: text/xml for SOAP (and XP) considered harmful

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:47:21 -0800
Message-ID: <00c701c0a290$d4a07610$98061812@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Narahari, Sateesh" <Sateesh_Narahari@jdedwards.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>I think the key point here is Simple "Object Access" Protocol. 
>If we really are accessing an object, then why are we saying 
>it is text?. 

I wouldn't get too hung up upon the spelling of the SOAP acronym - if
you read the spec there are many possible uses of SOAP.

>text/xml is such a generic one, what if its XML-RPC or 
>"my-own-xml-on-the-wire-in-the-format-we-define-dotcom" ?.
>
>Also is there any guarantee that XML is always going to be 
>"text" on the wire, what if the payload is compressed?. 

That is a different question entirely. In HTTP one could use the
Content-Encoding or the Transfer-Encoding mechanisms for this. 

>I too consider text/xml to be harmful, in terms of future 
>extensibility and potentially future protocols that may just 
>be text based and XML.

This has absolutely no impact on extensibility - it is just a token.

Henrik
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2001 15:48:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:58 GMT