- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:41:58 -0500 (EST)
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com (Noah Mendelsohn)
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org, ylafon@w3.org (Yves Lafon)
> A SOAP message without a body seems > to me to be a SOAP message that doesn't do anything, but carries in its > headers lots of modifiers that would have applied if you were doing > anything. Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't make sense to me. GET does do something (retrieval). It just does it without side-effect. Suppose somebody defines a transaction-id SOAP header. Wouldn't it be a good idea to permit GET to be used within a transactional context? Rich has defined a SOAP extension for authentication. Why not use that for GET too? I believe the same goes for any header which makes sense on an idempotent, side-effect free method. MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Friday, 1 February 2002 11:39:52 UTC