Re: FW: FW: Proposals to address SOAPAction header

We're talking about XMLP in this context anyway - so dropping
SOAPAction and/or adding a new attribute would be part of this
new spec.
-Dug

"Matt Long" <mlong@phalanxsys.com>@w3.org on 06/08/2001 03:04:05 PM

Sent by:  xml-dist-app-request@w3.org


To:   Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc:   <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
Subject:  FW: FW: Proposals to address SOAPAction header



Doug,

Does this not require alterations to both the SOAP v1.1 and WSDL v1.1 spec?

-Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 1:53 PM
To: Matt Long
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject: Re: FW: Proposals to address SOAPAction header


a 'target' attribute on the soap-env is just one.
-Dug


"Matt Long" <mlong@phalanxsys.com>@w3.org on 06/07/2001 07:25:14 PM

Sent by:  xml-dist-app-request@w3.org


To:   <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
cc:
Subject:  FW: Proposals to address SOAPAction header



Referencing the "B" proposal, what is the *scalable* alternative to WSDL
operation resolution for the document case without the use of SOAPAction?

-Matt Long

-----Original Message-----
From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Mark Nottingham
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:42 AM
To: XML Distributed Applications List
Subject: Proposals to address SOAPAction header


The W3C XML Protocol Working Group is attempting to address perceived
and reported problems with the "SOAPAction" mechanism in the HTTP
binding (see SOAP 1.1 Section 6.1.1 [1]). As part of this process,
the WG wishes to solicit comments and guidence on two proposals it
has generated, as below.

Comments must go to xmlp-comments@w3.org by 2001-06-18, and should
address the proposals as they sit, and may optionally make general
comments on resolution of issues with SOAPAction. Those representing
the positions of particular groups or organisations are requested to
clearly identify themselves as such. The WG encourages additional
discussion on the xml-dist-app@w3.org mailing list.

Neither of the following options precludes equivalent functionality
elsewhere.

Proposal A:
Use of SOAPAction is discouraged. SOAPAction is an optional part of
XMLP, supported but not required. Services MAY require SOAPAction and
any software wishing to access those services MUST be able to send
it.

Proposal B:
Use of SOAPAction is deprecated. Senders SHOULD NOT send SOAPAction.
Receivers MUST NOT accept or reject messages on the basis of the
presense, absence, or value of the SOAPAction header.

Regards,

Mark Nottingham
for the W3C XML Protocol Working Group


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383528


--
Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)

Received on Friday, 8 June 2001 19:21:42 UTC