- From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:35:28 +0100
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20040115093528.GA18868@w3.org>
Hi Mike. Nice work! Since everything else has been discussed, I'll just suggest two minor editorial tweaks: * Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com> [2004-01-09 14:12-0500] [..] > 1.6 Service Oriented Architecture [..] > It might be illustrative to note in this context that while "SOAP" is no > longer an acronym, there are two expansions of the term that reflect these > different ways in which the technology can be employed: For clarity reasons, saying what makes SOAP no longer an acronym is worth it IMO, replacing: | "SOAP" is no longer an acronym by: | SOAP Version 1.2 doesn't define "SOAP" as an acronym anymore > - Simple Object Access Protocol: A SOAP message represents a method > invocation on a remote object, and the serialization of in the argument list > of that method that must be moved from the local environment to the remote > environment. I would add the following: | When using the optional SOAP RPC Representation, > - Service Oriented Architecture Protocol: A SOAP message represents the > information needed to invoke a service or reflect the results of a service > invocation, and contains the information specified in the service interface > definition. I would maybe add: | In the general case, ... to balance with the previous case. Since I believe this is the general case, as well as our preferred use, I would maybe list it first, too. Regards, Hugo -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Thursday, 15 January 2004 08:45:16 UTC