MIME marking for SOAP and XP (was text/xml for SOAP (and XP) con sidered harmful)

• From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
• Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:14:31 -0800
• To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
• Message-ID: <C3729BBB6099B344834634EC67DE4AE1348FEA@red-msg-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

If I understand your reply "Were XP to be transport over something other
than HTTP, a content-type parameter might not be necessary at all", you
suggest that, when conveyed through HTTP on port 80, it is desirable to have
some indication on a XP message that it is an XP message and not some other
use of HTTP and XML.  (Similarly for SOAP.)  Presumably this makes life
easier for routers and similar processors. 

If so, then there seem to be at least the following mechanisms available to
mark the message:

1.	Use a distinguished HTTP header.

2.	Use a distinguished MIME type.

3.	Use a distinguished namespace on the root element of the XML
instance.

Numbers 1 and 3, both, are already specified to be present by the SOAP 1.1
design, and are presumably available options to XP.  Given their presence,
what is the motivation for wanting number two in addition?

Thanks.

Received on Wednesday, 27 December 2000 14:15:20 UTC