- From: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:10:30 -0400
- To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
- CC: jjmoreau@acm.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
You might draw that conclusion, but I think that equally, you could make support for attachments OPTIONAL and provide (as I have attempted to do [1]) a negotiation mechanism that allows the sender and receiver to find out what mechanisms are supported. I do think that SwA should be a core function at least of the default HTTP binding. My $0.02, Chris [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Jul/att-0161/01-xmlp-soap-1_2-sect6.html Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote: > Would you agree then, Chris, that a conclusion from your proposal is that > S+A should become a core function of SOAP? Everyone getting messages > should expect the possibility of attachments, and all conformant bindings > should support attachements (though not necessarily using MIME to carry > them)? Thanks. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 12:13:54 UTC