W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > June 2001

Re: XML Protocol: Proposals to address SOAPAction header

From: Simon Fell <soap@zaks.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 19:49:35 -0700
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org, xmlp-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <94f0it4ifem2k3d506s2m29s2gkfu34qav@4ax.com>
If A & B are the only choices they i'd pick B, A is just an interop
mess waiting to happen.

However, SOAPAction in its current (i.e. SOAP 1.1) form, does serve a
useful purpose, my only complaint is that the spec doesn't describe
very well how to use it.


On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:41:11 +0200, in soap you wrote:

>The W3C XML Protocol Working Group is attempting to address perceived and
>reported problems with the "SOAPAction" mechanism in the HTTP binding ( see
>SOAP 1.1 Section 6.1.1 [1] ). As part of this process, the WG wishes to
>comments and guidance on two proposals it has generated, as below.
>Comments must go to xmlp-comments@w3.org by 2001-06-18, and should address
>the proposals as they sit, and may optionally make general comments on
>resolution of issues with SOAPAction. Those representing the positions of
>particular groups or organizations are requested to clearly identify
>themselves as such. The WG encourages additional discussion on the
>mailing list.
>Neither of the following options precludes equivalent functionality
>Proposal A:
>Use of SOAPAction is discouraged.  SOAPAction is an optional part of XMLP,
>supported but not required.  Services MAY require SOAPAction and any
>software wishing to access those services MUST be able to send it.
>Proposal  B:
>Use of SOAPAction is deprecated.  Senders SHOULD NOT send SOAPAction.
>Receivers MUST NOT accept or reject messages on the basis of the presence,
>absence, or value of the SOAPAction header.
>Martin Gudgin
>For the W3C XML Protocol Working Group
>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383528
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2001 22:50:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:58 UTC