W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > September 2003

Re: "Bulk load" get/set

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:54:38 +0600
Message-ID: <00de01c3875a$653dc820$72545ecb@lankabook2>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

"Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org> writes:
> Erm, did I misread the minutes?  It seems to me that the WG *already*
> decided that get/set operations would be used.  That doesn't prescribe
> a binding, of course, but neither does my proposal; that the operations
> I proposed are "GET" and "PUT" doesn't prevent a binding to FTP RETR
> and STOR, for example.

I don't think I grok what you want the WG to do: Do you want us to
*force* all users to name the attribute get operations "GET" etc.?

Of course one can bind any operation to an HTTP GET if that's what
they wish (when we finish the HTTP bindings properly). I suspect
you want more than that ;-).

Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2003 09:55:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:34 UTC