Re: Updated SOAP HTTP GET binding document

On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 08:05:39PM -0700, David Orchard wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> You are indeed correct what my response is.  Please note that the section
> you quote is listed in the out-of-scope section.  I disagree that mapping
> all HTTP methods to SOAP methods is required to declare success.  What I
> understood from finding on issue 7 was that GET - particularly
> expressibility in URIs that are GET dereferencable - must be supportable.
> And this proposal attempts to satisfy that finding, not a generic HTTP
> Method to SOAP Method mapping.  FWIW, your mapping goal has never come up in
> the TAG.

Producing a mapping for all methods isn't required.

But somewhere, it MUST be said when the GET binding is appropriate,
versus when a POST binding is appropriate.

I assume you don't believe that it's a good thing to be able to send
any SOAP message with any binding.  But I understand that this is the
current interpretation of the word "binding" as used in SOAP 1.2; that
you can use them interchangeably without consideration for the content
of the SOAP message.  So perhaps calling this work a "suggested adjunct
to the SOAP 1.2 default HTTP binding" (or similar) would help clarify
that.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com

Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 23:20:44 UTC