W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2001

RE: [R3xx] Requirements Section "4.2 Simplicity and Stability" -- com parison with SOAP1.1.

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 19:48:26 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F192188@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Henrik Frystyk Nielsen'" <frystyk@microsoft.com>, "EZELL, DAVID (HP-Verifone,unix1)" <david_e3@verifone.com>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hi Henrik,

> Hi David,
> Thanks for sending this out - a few comments below

> > === R300
> > 
> > In SOAP1.1, "1. Introduction", SOAP specifically declines to define an
> > architecture, abstract or otherwise:  "SOAP does not itself define
> > any application semantics... or implementation semantics...; rather it
> > defines ... a modular packaging model and encoding mechanisms...".  
> I think there is a big difference between not defining any application
> semantics and not defining a model. As it absolutely is the intent that
> SOAP can be used to solve real world problems (carry application
> semantics) one could argue that it is not possible to have a protocol
> like SOAP without a model for how application semantics can be added.
> At least to me, the protocol binding model in SOAP is definitely a
> layering model allowing SOAP to be exchanged in a variety of ways
> without tying it to a single environment, no?
> > The semantics mentioned are some of the key elements in the abstract
> > models which are being introduced.
> I don't believe it is the purpose of the abstract model for XML Protocol
> to define application semantics - I think it is more a question of
> defining how the modules fit together: application semantics go here,
> transfer semantics go here, etc.

No argument here... I had some concerns seeing the phrase "application
semantics" and David did include:

	"Also note that "application" semantics are 
	clearly out of scope (as they are for SOAP1.1), 
	whereas "operational" semantics of a messaging 
	system are in scope."

Certainly, from my point-of-view the abstract model is really only trying to
construct a framework that will ultimately help us go forward into the
design process and hopefully will help us to articulate our design. 

> Henrik


Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2001 14:48:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:30 UTC