- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 16:16:31 +0100
- To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, www-tag@w3.org
Hi Mark, > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] > > Hi Stuart, > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 09:09:46AM +0100, Williams, Stuart wrote: > > Just a thought anyway... a 'null' SOAP request message as the 'trigger' to > > use HTTP GET rather than some other 'magical' incantation. What do you > > think? Others? Mark B? > > Noah's example was a good one to help illustrate the different ways in > which one can think of using SOAP, especially as it relates to making > use of the semantics of application protocols. > > But IMO, trying to build something HTTP-like on top of SOAP, which in > turn will often be on top of HTTP, is quite impractical and unnecessary. > It's true that HTTP's extensibility and processing models aren't as rich > as SOAP's, but also IMO, these small improvements are no where near > enough to justify the huge cost of deploying such a solution. Hmmm.... not sure I was trying to build "something HTTP-like" on top of SOAP. One of the 'complaints' levelled against the current HTTP binding in the SOAP WDs is there are no circumstances under which it uses HTTP GET. I was offering a slight modification to Noah's suggestion, which at least to me, seems to provide a natural way integrate GET into the request-response MEP. As with Noah's suggestion the burden of generating the request URI falls on the SOAP application, ie. it doesn't provide a scheme for URI encoding the contents of a SOAP message... I was hoping that you might respond along the lines of... that looks interesting... but apparently not. > I think that if SOAP has a future on the Web (as opposed to on the > Internet), it will be with the chameleon use where both SOAP and HTTP > are used by developers at the same time (though an EDI-like use of SOAP > over POST is fine, it's a niche). But I've yet to see a SOAP library > that supports such a use. As I have said before, that seems to me very much like treating SOAP as a media-type and the protocol is then HTTP with representations that just happen to be contained in SOAP envelope. [Observation, not a complaint]. There would be no need for a SOAP/HTTP binding, GET/PUT/HEAD/DELETE/POST all available as specified in HTTP. Equally, no sense of an independent abstraction of what SOAP is. > MB > -- > Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. > Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com > http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com > Regards Stuart
Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 11:16:55 UTC