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

Re: text/xml for SOAP is incorrect

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 17:44:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200109202144.RAA13498@markbaker.ca>
To: mnot@mnot.net (Mark Nottingham)
Cc: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com (John J. Barton), andrewl@microsoft.com (Andrew Layman), xml-dist-app@w3.org, dave@scripting.com
> Without going into REST/no-REST issues, I think these directives can
> be applied, as they would be considered advisory; if an intermediary
> has other knowledge with greater precedence (such as out-of-band
> configuration, or explicit targeting by a header) that it should
> perform an operation, it can. They're there more to protect from
> devices that would act without a specific directive, which is allowed
> by the HTTP.

But an entirely opaque content type would (theoretically) ensure that
only SOAP processors could transform the message.  That's the concern
here, right?  I think application/soap does just that.  Are you aware
of any intermediary that transforms "application/*" bodies?

I'll have to give the no-cache issue more thought.  I haven't
seen it used with POST, so I'm not sure how or why it's important
in that context.  But I currently don't see a need to say anything
beyond what HTTP already says about it.  If somebody finds a good
use of it over a non-SOAP POST, then it can also be used with a
SOAP POST.

MB
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 17:43:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT