Re: Counting noses on "is SOAP and/or WSDL intrinsic to the definitio n of Web service" from Jean-Jacques Moreau on 2003-06-06 (www-ws-arch@w3.org from June 2003)

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:10:08 +0200
To: Jeff Mischkinsky <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>
CC: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <3EE0AED0.4020600@crf.canon.fr>

and WSDL (1.2) probably only means SOAP 1.2 and HTTP anyway.

JJ.

Jeff Mischkinsky wrote:
> Hi,
>    I pretty much agree with Chris here.
>    From my perspective it seems like a no-brainer that WSDL is required.
>    I think "at least" SOAP is required for interop reasons. Other 
> bindings are perfectly fine, but a minimum i think we should put in the 
> constraint that a SOAP binding is always required.
> 
>    I guess that makes me a +10.
> 
> cheers,
> jeff

Received on Friday, 6 June 2003 11:10:34 UTC