Re: text/xml for SOAP is incorrect

On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 01:49:12PM -0700, John J. Barton wrote:
> SOAP is-a instance of XML.  Expressing this narrowing in a typename
> leads us down the path of distributed object systems. Each new
> restriction motivates a new sub-typename.  The tree of subtypes
> must be propagated to all clients/servers and subsystems. The
> effective API becomes broader and broader, increasingly
> incomprehensible.  Of course you can say SOAP is really special and
> it will be the last subtype we need.  Well, except for a couple
> more, application/msn+xml, application/hp-printing+xml, and
> application/aol+xml.

This seems to be a slippery slope argument, and also appears to be
based on the premise that the intention is to use content-type to
identify something beyond the format of the message (i.e., SOAP).

This issue at hand is whether SOAP should have its own content-type,
or if it should be lumped with all other uses of application/xml.
Using application/soap+xml allows identification of messages that use
the SOAP conventions, and neither encourages or precludes the use of
other content-types with SOAP messages.

Identification of SOAP messages without cracking open the envelope
has been extensively discussed; content-type is the most
widely-supported means of identifying a message type in MIMEish
protocols such as HTTP and SMTP.


Cheers,

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2001 17:40:44 UTC