W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > August 2002

Re: issue 227

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 11:14:40 -0400
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>, jacek@systinet.com, jones@research.att.com, marc.hadley@sun.com, moreau@crf.canon.fr, xmlp-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020822111440.I30715@www.markbaker.ca>

Stuart, I'm in complete agreement with your evaluation of the binding
framework, and I'm not out to set a precedent that other features
need to consider design-time issues.

My concern is that our response[1] to the TAG said this;

"We have defined a new "web method" feature [3] that enables
applications to control the use of GET and POST."

and the proposal[2] they read said (and still says);

"Bindings to HTTP or such other protocols SHOULD use the Web Method
Specification Feature to give applications control over the Web methods
to be used when sending a SOAP message."

If by "application" we meant the runtime chunk of software, including
the SOAP library (if any), rather than code developed by the application
developer, then we should have said that, and not expected the TAG (well,
two thirds of them anyhow 8-) to know this nuance of XMLP WG
nomenclature.  Instead, the word could easily have been interpreted by
the TAG as referring to the application code written by developers.

So ...

If it is the case that I was using a different interpretation of
"application", then I agree that we can close issue 227.  But we should
also clarify our response to the TAG to make it clear what it was that
we were saying.

 [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2002Jun/0006
 [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/06/soap12-part2.html#WebMethodFeature

Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 11:29:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:59 UTC