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

Re: text/xml vs. application/soap

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 17:12:14 +0200 (CEST)
To: Grahame Grieve <grahame@kestral.com.au>
cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0207181710410.25626-100000@mail.idoox.com>

 it's application/soap+xml (note the added +xml).
 Anyway, this MIME type is used in SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding, whereas 
the SOAP 1.1 HTTP binding uses text/xml. Therefore SOAP 1.1 nodes 
(the prevalent ones now) accept text/xml. The SOAP 1.2 aware 
nodes shall accept application/soap+xml.
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation

On Fri, 19 Jul 2002, Grahame Grieve wrote:

 > The current specification says that the MimeType for SOAP/HTTP should
 > be application/soap
 > I haven't yet found a production SOAP service that uses application/soap,
 > they all use text/xml. Many barf, often with no explanation, when the
 > mime type is application/soap (I've just been playing with the
 > Sun Forte Soap kit on Tomcat and it does - not sure whether mine
 > was a current version)
 > I'm interested in opinions here - what should a SOAP library
 > do about this? Is there any way to tell whether a service
 > expects text/xml or application/soap
 > ta
 > Grahame
Received on Thursday, 18 July 2002 11:12:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:20 UTC