- From: Daniela Florescu <daniela.florescu@propel.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:14:50 -0700
- To: "'Rich Salz'" <rsalz@zolera.com>, costello@mitre.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
I don't think it is a naive comment at all. In fact, I strongly agree with Roger and I support the idea that the WG should seriously consider to toss the section 5, or to put it in a different (non mandatory) document. The way I wrap the internal data of my application (PL/SQL or Cobol for example because I am a database person) into an XML document is my own internal business, and I think it is inappropriate for a W3C WG to standardize on this. In fact, section 5 does not help me at all in this task, it just provides noise that makes my task more difficult. From my own experience, none of the companies that I know or work with seriously consider to use the information in Section 5 when they map their internal data into Soap message bodies. Thinking that they will do is naive. My 3 cents and a half, Dana > -----Original Message----- > From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@zolera.com] > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 7:27 PM > To: costello@mitre.org; xml-dist-app@w3.org > Subject: Re: Toss section 5 (create SOAP-lite) > > > By design, SOAP enables both structured-data and xml-document > exchange. > Just because you find the latter completely sufficient is no > reason cut > the bar in half. :) > > So yes, I'd say it's a naive comment. > /r$ > > > -- > Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures, > Encryption) > http://www.zolera.com >
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2001 12:15:23 UTC