- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 00:52:06 +0100
- To: "Anne Thomas Manes" <anne@manes.net>, <jsled@asynchronous.org>
- Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
[snip] > > <atm> It is. But Savas was suggesting an even simpler convention (no > parameter). Unfortunately, Savas's suggestion is incompatible with the > SOAP > 1.2 WebMethod feature. </atm> > Yup. In light of the SOAP 1.2 WebMethod feature for the HTTP binding that I was not aware of, I agree that the ?* suffix convention is the better way if one was to use HTTP GET on a URL. However, I still prefer the WS-MetadataExchange spec since it's a pure SOAP-based approach and hence transport protocol-agnostic. I merely suggested the "simple" HTTP GET approach as a possible alternative given that Roger thought that WS-MetadataExchange is complex. However, that won't work with SOAP 1.2 as Anne explained. I was wrong in my suggestion. In the architecture of Indigo, the focus is on the SOAP messages being exchanged over arbitrary transport protocols. Hence the need to move away from HTTP-only mechanisms! Regards, .savas.
Received on Friday, 2 July 2004 19:52:17 UTC