- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:44:52 -0000
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Hi Jonathan, > ... > > - simpler processing of the message by applications or intermediaries > > > > I personally don't see why wsa:action enables these. Checking the > value > > of the wsa:action header isn't as simple as checking the qname of the > > soap:Body child in order to infer semantics or any other > > protocol-specific header as suggested in [1]? > ... > > Sometimes it's not so simple to check the QName of the soap:Body child. > Sanjiva listed security and reliability as complicating factors [1]. > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0184.ht > ml Yup, I totally understand this. I don't disagree that in situations where the headers are left unencrypted there can be a processing speed advantage. I note however that the same is true for any protocol-specific headers that could be used for the same purpose. e.g. <soap:Header> <ws-mex:GetMetadata /> </soap:Header> But I guess that's a different discussion. Many thanks! .savas.
Received on Monday, 8 November 2004 20:45:11 UTC