- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:51:21 -0400
- To: "'Omprakash Bachu '" <omprakash.bachu@mphasis.com>, "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
SOAP does not assume HTTP or TCP/IP, it is "protocol neutral". More specifically, one use case for SOAP is to logically bridge different protocols that may not be able to represent each other's semantic information. For example, consider a remote client that uses SMTP/POP to connect a mobile device to a communications server, then uses HTTP to connect the communications service to an application running on another machine. If one "leg" fails, the built-in failure handling mechanisms (e.g. 404 errors) don't propagate to the other leg(s). Of course, an application can invent some ways to propagate those errors and compensate for them (e.g. by retrying, ignoring duplicates, etc.) but that is NOT built into the infrastructure. I would agree that in the common -- to many on this list, but definitely NOT the audience of enterprise-level systems integrations -- case of simple HTTP-based apps over the Web do not necessarily get profound benefit from the reliability extensions to SOAP (or SOAP itself, for that matter). On the other hand, the ubiquity of SOAP and WSDL mean that essentially every commercially important programming environment supports them, so they may offer convenience to the developer. And the true benefits of SOAP and SOAP-based extensions such as the ones discussed here start to become apparent when one is NOT in a homogenous networking environment. -----Original Message----- From: Omprakash Bachu To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Sent: 5/15/2003 2:36 PM Subject: Re: Announce: WS-Callback, WS-MessageData, and WS-Acknowledgement specifications I'm kind of curious why do we need the WS-Acknowledgement when SOAP is over HTTP which is anyway TCP/IP based protocol ??? Is this meant for SOAP over other protocols like UDP? Cheers!!! Om
Received on Friday, 16 May 2003 11:51:32 UTC