- From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 07:49:48 -0700
- To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "'christopher ferris'" <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>, "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Simon Fell" <soap@zaks.demon.co.uk>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
I think I can resolve both of these problems. 1. When not going through HTTP there is no SOAPAction header. Therefore you can't use it if you're not going over HTTP, and can use it if you are. 2. If an intermediary doesn't pass the SOAPAction header when going through HTTP, it will break the application at the end (or in the middle) who depends on the SOAPAction header. There you go. These are not reasons to say goodbye to SOAPAction. They're just things to be aware of if you're building an application that goes over transports other than HTTP or uses an intermediary that is not SOAPAction-friendly. (BTW, I'm not sure there are any intermediaries at this time, so this could be added as a caveat for future intermediaries -- please pass on the SOAPAction header.) Have a great day one and all!! Dave
Received on Monday, 11 June 2001 10:50:54 UTC