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

Re: Issue 133, and permitting no body

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 13:57:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200202011857.NAA08192@markbaker.ca>
To: ylafon@w3.org (Yves Lafon)
Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com (Noah Mendelsohn), xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Hum, that's the problem when you forget some while lines in an email.

8-)

> urlencoding of SOAP message is useful if you know in advance that the
> method called will be idempotent, and a way to call it

I assume you meant "side-effect free" rather than "idempotent" here.

> ex: http://www.example.com/stockquote?soap=<urlencoded enveloppe>.
> or  http://www.example.com/stockquote;soap=<urlencoded enveloppe>

The issue I have with this is that the meaning of the invocation
is no longer "GET", it's whatever is in the SOAP envelope.  So even if
the meaning in the body is side-effect free, unless it means GET as
defined in RFC 2616, it's tunneling.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Friday, 1 February 2002 13:56:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:06 GMT