- From: David Burdett <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 16:54:48 -0700
- To: "'Henrik Frystyk Nielsen'" <frystyk@microsoft.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Eric Prud'hommeaux'" <eric@w3.org>, Ken MacLeod <ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us>, xml-dist-app@w3.org, Janet Daly <janet@w3.org>
Henrik says ... >>>David brings up good points - no doubt about that but I think we have to keep in mind which layer(s) they apply to<<< I agree. But what layers do we need, when do need to develop them and in what sequence? David -----Original Message----- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen [mailto:frystyk@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 4:51 PM To: Dan Connolly Cc: David Burdett; 'Eric Prud'hommeaux'; Ken MacLeod; xml-dist-app@w3.org; Janet Daly Subject: Re: Announcement: WWW9 Panel on XML and Protocols, 17 May 2000 > > As such, it is not strictly fair to apply requirements to SOAP for which > > it intentionally has nothing to say. I do not argue that the > > requirements that you mention are not important but you also mention > > that they are applicable to a specific set scenarios that may not be > > globally valid. The real question is therefore whether SOAP allows you > > to build such applications while remaining as simple and straight > > forward as possible. > > Really? Is that what everybody else things the real question is? Within the context of requirements applied directly to SOAP, then I think so. David brings up good points - no doubt about that but I think we have to keep in mind which layer(s) they apply to. > I thought David's point about publish/subscribe etc. was very > relevant to the discussion at hand, i.e. what problem, if > any, should W3C charter a working group (or working groups) to solve? Henrik
Received on Tuesday, 11 April 2000 19:56:04 UTC