RE: "Marchitecture" text for stack diagram

The rephrasing sounds good to me. I also completely support the concept you are trying to get across..

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 10:42 AM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: "Marchitecture" text for stack diagram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 12:27 PM
> > To: Mike Champion; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: "Marchitecture" text for stack diagram
> > 
> > 
> 
> > 
> > The statement seems to imply that the importance of SOAP's 
> > envelope and processing model is limited to cases where 
> > intermediaries are present. I think their importance stands 
> > by itself and does not depend on the existence of 
> > intermediaries (e.g. the envelope carries information that 
> > many transports would not be able to handle).
>  
> OK, how about:
> 
> "While very simple information transfer services can be 
> implemented without
> SOAP, secure, reliable,  multi-part, multi-party and/or multi-network
> applications are much easier to build if there is a standard way of
> packaging the messaging information in a protocol neutral 
> way.  This also
> allows the messaging infrastructure (which may be specialized 
> hardware, SOAP
> intermediaries, or code libraries called by the ultimate 
> recipient of a SOAP
> message) to provide authentication, encryption, access 
> control, ransaction
> processing, routing, delivery confirmation, etc. services. 
> SOAP's envelope
> (and  attachment) structure and header / processing model 
> have proven to be
> a very robust and  powerful framework within which to do this."
> 
> I'd like to get across the value that SOAP brings to the 
> messaging "box"
> above and beyond the value that XML and standardized Web 
> protocols bring.
> Please continue to suggest improvements!
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 14:20:34 UTC