W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2006

Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:08:53 -0500
To: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
Cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-id: <43C3F835.6000009@tibco.com>
Rich Salz wrote:

>>That's a different MEP.  If your transport gives you request-response
>>natively, you use "request-response with optional SOAPiness".  If it
>>gives you true fire and forget, you use "fire-and-forget one-way" (TBD).
>Thanks for the clarification.
>Do you htink it's legitimate for parts of the SOAP stack to turn a "no
>SOAP response" from the transport/transfer layer, into an empty soap
I've proposed it (it's "DH1" on the table I sent a while ago), but I'm
no longer so sure it's the best way to go.

>	/r$
Received on Tuesday, 10 January 2006 18:09:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:28 UTC