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

Re: Clarifying optionality of HTTP binding

From: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:02:49 -0500
Message-ID: <3C9B1D69.1010805@sun.com>
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
CC: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
typo: s/me/may/

also, haven't we been calling this the "default" HTTP
binding? [1]. Shouldn't we be consistent in calling it that?

Cheers,

Chris

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> Done :)
> 
> Henrik 
> 
> 
>><proposed>
>>"The purpose of the SOAP HTTP binding is to provide a binding 
>>of SOAP to
>>HTTP. It is important to note that use of the SOAP HTTP binding is
>>optional and that nothing precludes the specification of different
>>bindings to other protocols, or indeed to define other 
>>bindings to HTTP.
>>Because of the optionality of using the SOAP HTTP binding, it is NOT a
>>requirement to implement it as part of a SOAP node.  A node 
>>that does correctly 
>>and completely implement the HTTP binding me to be said to 
>>"conform to the 
>>SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding.""
>></proposed>
>>
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 07:03:45 GMT

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