My problem with SOAPAction (as it is defined in SOAP 1.1) is the use of the word MUST, as in: An HTTP client must use this header field when issuing a SOAP HTTP Request. I can't see why this is required. While I can imagine that SOAPAction is useful in some situations, I can't see any basis for claiming that it is always necessary. If a provider of a service requires the SOAPAction header, then they can describe their service as requiring it (e.g., in WSDL). For those of us that have no use for SOAPAction, I see no reason why my HTTP SOAP clients should be compelled to include the SOAPAction header. We don't use SOAPAction in any of our SOAP implementations. The only basis I can see for requiring the SOAPAction header is some attempt at forward compatibility (i.e., in case you need to use it someday). If I did need SOAPAction someday, then I would simply publish a new endpoint that described the requirement for the SOAPAction header. I suggest that the SOAP 1.1 requirement that the SOAPAction header "MUST" be toned down to a "MAY". Andy NeilsonReceived on Thursday, 10 May 2001 11:48:09 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:01 GMT