Re: Another try at HTTP binding

Philippe,

I feel ashamed, but I haven't yet had time to read your revised 
proposal. I hope to be able to do this next week.

JJ.

Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 11:38, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> 
>>Philippe, is there any chance you could provide a diff over the 
>>existing spec text (or any other mechanism that you might deem 
>>appropriate), to make it easier to evaluate your proposed changes?
> 
> 
> Jean-Jacques, here is the document:
> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-httpbinding.html
> 
> Note: to avoid messing up the Part 3, I'm working on a standalone
> version of HTTP binding document. The intent is to fold it into our
> current documents after appropriate reviews and changes.
> 
> I rewrote the proposal to make it closer to the approach taken by XForms
> 1.0. As Mark noted, XForms 1.0 does not allow you to put data into the
> path of the URI. I left it in the document however, marked with an issue
> on it (as discussed during last week teleconference).
> 
> Changes from earlier proposals:
> - HTTP POST does no longer let you put data into the URI.
> - List of simple types are no longer as pairs of name/value, but instead
> using a single pair (that simplify the definition of the URI style).
> - New attribute to select the character separator in URIs.
> - New mechanism to select the serialization format (and the HTTP method
> at the same time).
> - Introduced the URI and Multipart operation styles.
> 
> I still didn't manage to come up with a proposal for HTTP headers,
> especially since we don't @headers attribute anymore.
> 
> Issues are inline in the document.
> 
> Philippe
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 5 February 2004 10:43:23 UTC