- From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:58:01 +0100
- To: Marwan Sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>
- CC: Kumeda <kumeda@atc.yamatake.co.jp>, "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Marwan Sabbouh wrote: > > Your assertion: if the binding support a specific > flavour of request response ( where a specific flavour of request > response is identified by a URI and is an instance of a message exchange > pattern... , then we "can write my SOAP application in blissfull ignorance of which > underlying protocol is being used rather than tying it to a particular underlying protocol > and it's details" > > Please explain that? > > it is unclear to me how the above assertion hold true or what the real value is. It seems > to me that the SOAP application programmer still needs ( and wants) to specify the protocol > he needs to use. > This is where we disagree. The application programmer shouldn't care what the underlying protocol is, only that it supports the semantics required by the application. e.g. if the application only requires a request-response message exchange pattern then it would work over any binding that supports request-response. Why tie it to HTTP only ? Regards, Marc. -- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com> XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2001 06:59:56 UTC