W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Proposal for dealing with issue 200: SOAPAction header vs. action parameter

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 11:51:18 -0700
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Message-Id: <EF9C8256-516A-11D6-8080-000A27836A68@mnot.net>

No, part of my head was still thinking in terms of "header," ignoring 
the part that agreed with #1 ;) There was a draft describing a header at 
one point, but IIRC it was never submitted, and is irrelevant now.

Sorry, my mistake.


On Tuesday, April 16, 2002, at 11:46  AM, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

>
> Hmm, I was referring to the media type draft - I know this may sound
> silly but do we have other drafts not linked from [2]?
>
> Henrik
>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/#drafts
>
>>> 3) The spec editors should add a note to the spec that we know that
>>> this is an ID with no standing.
>>
>> FYI, [1] is winding its way through the process; if it becomes
>> standard,
>> the I-D will not become necessary (W3C will be able to
>> directly request
>> the header registration from IANA, IIRC). It's probably still
>> a safe bet
>> to maintain the draft for the time being, though.
>>
--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 14:51:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT