- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 08:19:10 -0700
- To: "'Hugo Haas'" <hugo@w3.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>* Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com> [2001-04-27 11:12-0400] >> We could have used the media type but that makes it impossible to >> distinguish posting a SOAP message as just data vs. as a SOAP HTTP >> request. Also, it is much harder to define nested bindings like MIME >> multipart/related [2] as they already have defined media types and we >> would then have to special case this or have the server look through >> the message to see whether there is a SOAP message hidden in there >> somewhere. > >Could you please elaborate on that? It is not just "plain xml" but in fact a SOAP message that one might not want to have treated as a SOAP message. Regarding the latter, the media type for SOAP MIME multipart is "Multipart/Related", not text/xml, see [3]. >For example, using text/xml for plain XML and >application/soap+xml (or something else) for a processable >SOAP message would do the job. [2] http://www.w3.org/tr/soap-attachments [3] http://www.w3.org/tr/soap-attachments Henrik
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2001 11:20:39 UTC