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

Re: SOAP/XML Protocol and filtering, etc.

From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:33:26 -0700
Message-ID: <15c201c0d7cb$d8b2e6f0$33a1dc40@murphy>
To: "Keith Moore" <moore@cs.utk.edu>, "Dick Brooks" <dick@8760.com>
Cc: <moore@cs.utk.edu>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>, <ietf@ietf.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Does the HTTP spec allow applications to add headers?

If so, what the heck is the argument about?

BTW, I thought SOAPAction was dorky when I first heard the idea. But it's

There's deployment based on SOAPAction.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Moore" <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: "Dick Brooks" <dick@8760.com>
Cc: <moore@cs.utk.edu>; "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>;
"Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>; <ietf@ietf.org>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 6:25 AM
Subject: Re: SOAP/XML Protocol and filtering, etc.

> > >far better for the SOAP-specific message broker to have intimate
> > >of the SOAP-specific payload, than to have the SOAP-specific message
> > >to have intimate knowledge of the HTTP-specific request header.
> >
> > I never said a message broker was SOAP specific.
> a message broker that looks at a SOAPAction header isn't SOAP specific?
> > There are message brokers running on HTTP servers that can dispatch
> > processing for EDIINT AS2, GISB EDM, AIAG E-5, ebXML, SOAP and other
> what you are saying is that there are people out there who do not
> the value of clean separation of function between layers.  how is that a
> justification for a standards-setting organization to propagate that
> misunderstanding?
> Keith
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2001 10:34:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:13 UTC