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

Re: Possibility of an XML Document Type

From: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:10:30 -0400
Message-ID: <3BC472F6.3040209@sun.com>
To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
CC: jjmoreau@acm.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
You might draw that conclusion, but I think that equally,
you could make support for attachments OPTIONAL and provide
(as I have attempted to do [1]) a negotiation mechanism that
allows the sender and receiver to find out what mechanisms
are supported.

I do think that SwA should be a core function at least of
the default HTTP binding.

My $0.02,


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Jul/att-0161/01-xmlp-soap-1_2-sect6.html

Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote:

> Would you agree then, Chris, that a conclusion from your proposal is that 
> S+A should become a core function of SOAP?  Everyone getting messages 
> should expect the possibility of attachments, and all conformant bindings 
> should support attachements (though not necessarily using MIME to carry 
> them)?  Thanks.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
> Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 12:13:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT