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

Re: Issue 133, and permitting no body

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 16:18:36 -0800
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020204161835.B10045@mnot.net>

On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 02:40:51PM -0500, Mark Baker wrote:
> > Here SOAP messages would be directly seen as representations of the state of
> > the resource referenced by the request URI (or its subordinates). Here one
> > essentially views SOAP as syntax for representing resource state. This
> > really feels like HTTP with SOAP as the syntax for entity bodies. 
> Right.  I have to disagree with MarkN's response to this; any 2xx
> response to a POST includes a representation of a resource (even 204).
> It's just that the resource is so transient that there's no point
> providing a URI for it in most cases (and if there is, we can use 3xx
> to redirect to it).

Oops; that was poorly put on my part, and that's a good way to say
it, Mark.


Mark Nottingham
Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 19:18:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:18 UTC