W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2004

RE: request for clarification of SOAP/HTTP binding in SOAP 1.2

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:40:15 -0700
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF094A81B7@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

I'd like to follow a bit further on this.

It is my understanding that the SOAP Request-Response MEP does not
constrain what goes in the request and the response, merely that when
using request-response and the SOAP HTTP binding then the request part
of the MEP goes in the HTTP request and the response part of the MEP
goes in the HTTP response.  

Specifically, it does not say that an application level request/response
(ie wsdl operation) is constrained to use a single req-resp MEP.  It is
a perfectly valid use of the SOAP req-resp MEP for an application level
req/resp to use two(2) req-resp MEPs when bound to SOAP.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 6:53 AM
> To: Anish Karmarkar
> Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana; xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: request for clarification of SOAP/HTTP binding in SOAP
1.2
> 
> 
> Also unofficially, my analysis substantially agrees with Anish's.  The
> limitation is, of course, in the particular HTTP binding.  It would be
> quite possible in principle to write a specification for a different
HTTP
> binding that used the existing MEP in the manner that you propose.  I
> think you might be able to write it so that client enabled for the new
> bindings would also interop with the old (I.e. depending dynamically
on
> whether the full response came back immediately as the existing
binding
> requires.)   Whether such an additional binding would represent an
> appropriate use of HTTP POST semantics is a separate question, but
from
> SOAP's point of view I think it would be a new binding in any
> case...merely because the existing binding does not enable the
behavior
> you desire.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 31 July 2004 11:41:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:18 GMT