- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 05:06:39 -0400
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
All, For those of you who don't follow the TAG or the XML Protocol Working Group, the TAG recently said[1] that the lack of GET support in the default SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding was counter to Web architecture. The implications of this decision, and the resulting response[2] of the XML Protocol Working Group, should, IMO, be studied carefully by all working groups in the Web Services Activity, and the Web Services Architecture Working Group in particular. The first and most obvious thing that this means, is that if the underlying protocol is HTTP, that a SOAP developer must be aware of that fact. In other words, it is counter to Web architecture to treat SOAP as a layer when bound to HTTP, which virtually all SOAP 1.1 based Web services do. Today, for us, this means that D-AR003.1[3] is incorrect (at least what it's intended to mean), and should be rephrased to ensure that the Web services reference architecture exposes the semantics of underlying application protocols (or at the very least, HTTP GET). This was also *roughly* the conclusion[4] of a recent discussion - with limited input by the WG - about this draft requirement. This decision also highlights the value of D-AR003.2[5], the recently added draft requirement on an "a priori interface". "GET" is a key method of this interface, as are the other HTTP methods that operate on resources, plus the "faults" (aka "status codes") that those methods return. I discussed this here[6]. Going forward, I suggest that this decision has significant consequences for our work. Primary amoungst them, I believe, is that the "assumed architecture" that many (most?) WG members have in mind - the one that looks like OMA/CORBA - does not have very much to do with Web architecture, and any architectural decisions that are made assuming that it does, will inevitably meet with objection from the TAG if we incorporate them into our work. I look forward to some discussion on what other WG members thinks this means for us. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2002May/0018 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2002Jun/0006 (member only) [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wd-wsa-reqs-20020605.html#AR003.1 [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0443 [5] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wd-wsa-reqs-20020605.html#AR003.6 [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0302 MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Friday, 14 June 2002 04:56:49 UTC