- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 12:36:35 -0400
- To: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Cc: www-ws@w3.org, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 12:14:47PM -0400, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > Mark, > > I'm sorry -- but I just don't see how you view Mike's response as > "agreement". I was looking at the "Uh, OK" part as reluctant agreement. That he saw no point in agreeing is a separate issue. > With this message you seem to be changing your definition. Now you are > talking about "hardcoded to a generic application". That's all I've ever talked about. If that wasn't obvious, I apologize, but I am being very careful with my wording. > Per this new definition, > all Web services management products qualify as a "hardcoded" SOAP > intermediary. They are hardcoded to process generic SOAP messages. Again, SOAP defines no application methods, while HTTP and other application protocols do. A generic processing model is not a generic application. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis Actively seeking contract work or employment
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2003 12:33:25 UTC