- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:23:28 -0500 (EST)
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
RFC 2822 is not a protocol. "Reply-To" is advisory. It's not asking
the recipient to reply, it's saying that *if* you reply, *please* (but
if not, that's ok too) reply to this address. It's no more a protocol
than a set of SOAP headers.
Here's how I view RFC 2822 in comparison with SOAP;
RFC 2822 = SOAP envelope (with a different syntax)
- mandatory extensions
- intermediary targetting
- processing model & faults
+ a set of headers
There's no protocol there! Everything that makes SOAP a protocol has no
counterpart in RFC 2822.
It should also be noted that HTTP uses RFC 2822/822, and reuses many of
the same headers. But I don't believe that you'd claim that HTTP was an
email protocol. So, until we say what transfer semantics are used by
this envelope (POST, DATA, PUT, STOR, etc..), we have not bound to a
protocol.
As much as I'd like to explore this further with you, I'll refrain from
responding to the rest of your comments and questions, just to try to
expedite a solution.
MB
--
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Saturday, 16 March 2002 16:18:52 UTC