- From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 10:22:36 -0800
- To: "Larry Cable" <larry.cable@sun.com>
- Cc: <mmurata@trl.ibm.co.jp>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> Larry Masinter wrote: > > > Actually, SOAP should use > > application/soap+xml > > why not just application/soap or application/xp ??? > > what's in a name? Well, MIME media types are not just 'names', they're specifically used to invoke different kinds of processing From http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-murata-xml-09.txt section 7: XML generic processing is not always appropriate for XML-based media types. For example, authors of some such media types may wish that the types remain entirely opaque except to applications that are specifically designed to deal with that media type. By NOT following the naming convention '+xml', such media types can avoid XML-generic processing. Since generic processing will be useful in many cases, however -- including in some situations that are difficult to predict ahead of time -- those registering media types SHOULD use the '+xml' convention unless they have a particularly compelling reason not to. So the question is whether it is desirable that intermediaries might intercept and process SOAP messages using XML-generic processing. If it is, then application/xp+xml or application/soap+xml is appropriate. If not, then application/xp is appropriate. In neither case is application/xml or text/xml appropriate. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2000 13:23:51 UTC