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

RE: text/xml for SOAP is incorrect

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 15:53:25 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D04CA191E@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@idoox.com>, "christopher ferris" <chris.ferris@Sun.COM>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

>> Well, isn't this how we have defined a mechanism for 
>identifying SOAP 
>> -- by the use of a specific XML Namespace identifier?
>It's a mechanism for identifying in the context of XML; i.e., 
>by an XML processor. Not necessarily by a MIME processor.

Right, but then why isn't application/xml sufficient?

>Current practice seems to indicate so. I think most people 
>here will acknowledge that content-type has limitations, some 
>of them severe. However, if we step back and limit the 
>discussion to 'what content-type is typically used for, and 
>therefore what should our content-type be?', rather than 
>overloading it 'what content-type should be/could be capable 
>of', I think the answer is fairly simple.

I don't actually think this is the issue but whenever somebody wants to
establish a central registry--especially for things that a *lot* of
design work has gone into avoiding central registration, like is the
case for URIs and XML namespaces, I think there should be a really good
reason for doing so. To be quite frank I don't see that in RFC 3023.

Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2001 18:55:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:15 UTC