- From: Glyn Normington <glyn_normington@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:38:12 +0000
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Some comments. I apologise for repeating some observations sent previously to the list, but I think they still need to be addressed. General * It appears that the only standard features are the SRR MEP and the HTTP binding specific SOAP Action. I'm concerned that there are so few instances of such an apparently important concept. Should, for example, at-most-once delivery, ordered delivery, and absence of message loss be defined as standard features so that it is clear which of these features specific transport bindings support? R604 says that the XMLP spec. must consider message paths over multiple transport protocols. Consideration of a transport such as SMTP and of multi-hop scenarios involving both HTTP and SMTP could help to clarify which features are transport-specific and which are required of all (useful) transport bindings. SRR MEP * The default HTTP binding describes a state transition in the requesting SOAP node from 'waiting' to 'requesting' in the case of a 3xx redirection response. If that is allowed, the state transition diagram in the SRR MEP should be updated to reflect this. Default HTTP Binding * The document should state what version of HTTP is intended. I would hope the binding is suitable for HTTP v1.0 and later. * What assumptions are being made regarding interoperation at the protocol level with SOAP 1.1 bound to HTTP? Glyn Normington (The views expressed above are not necessarily those of IBM.)
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 10:37:48 UTC