- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 08:21:12 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 05:47:10AM -0700, Champion, Mike wrote: > What about the option of putting in a paragraph or so acknowledging that XML > over HTTP is a "Level [0|1]" web service, but that you have to "pay the > SOAP/WSDL tax" (rephrased, of course) to get the additional benefits that > the higher levels of the web services stack entail? I would personally be against such a characterization. I would say that XML-over-HTTP is an extremely advanced form of Web service that doesn't gain any benefit from the Web services stack (as in [1]). It would be more accurate to say that a Web service is a "Level 0" Web resource. For the reference architecture, I'd be happy if we don't do anything to preclude HTTP from being used. For example, not requiring that all messages use the XML syntax. Even many SOAP 1.1+WSDL based Web services use HTTP GET for returning WSDL. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/issues/wsa-issues.html#x5 MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2002 08:18:50 UTC