RE: Caveats for Web-friendly service description

On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 08:39 -0700, David Orchard wrote:
> > preclude to have only one. I would agree with Tim here and be worried
> > about the cost of trying to do so. We already excluded SOAP messages
> for
> > example.
> I don't think we've precluded SOAP.  I don't see any proposal so far
> that precludes saying that an HTTP POST input is-a soap envelope and the
> response is-a soap envelope.  Much of WSDL's focus is describing the
> content of a soap envelope, which seems out of scope for what we are
> interested in.  

Agreed. Nothing should preclude using the media type "application/soap
+xml", but describing SOAP headers or SOAP Body are out of scope, or
doing some special handling with the schema for SOAP.


Received on Thursday, 2 June 2005 16:13:03 UTC