Saturday, 29 June 2002
- Re: differences between soap 1.1 and soap 1.2
- Re: differences between soap 1.1 and soap 1.2
- Re: differences between soap 1.1 and soap 1.2
Friday, 28 June 2002
- MS SOAP 1.2 endpoint
- What is the difference between a "struct" and an "array" in the e dge case?
- FW: Two new Internet drafts: DIME and WS-Attachments
- Re: SOAP
- differences between soap 1.1 and soap 1.2
- Re: LC Issues from Spec reviews
- LC Issues from Spec reviews
- Re: HTTP 427 in SOAP 1.2 Primer
- Re: Root Attribute Still in SOAP 1.2?
- SOAP
- HTTP 427 in SOAP 1.2 Primer
Thursday, 27 June 2002
Wednesday, 26 June 2002
Tuesday, 25 June 2002
Monday, 24 June 2002
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Lose 14 Pounds In 7 Days 11604
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
Friday, 21 June 2002
- Re: WSDL Version 1.2 Part 2: Bindings, date 2002/4/11
- Re: Henrik's media type comments
- Re: Henrik's media type comments
Thursday, 20 June 2002
Wednesday, 19 June 2002
- RE: Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?
- Does anyone know if there is a existing XML Schema for this application?
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Henrik's media type comments
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Double Your Life Insurance at NO EXTRA COST!
- SOAP v1.1: Using SOAP for RPC and return value
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Correction; updated media type draft
- Henrik's media type comments
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?
Tuesday, 18 June 2002
- Re: Processing Instructions and SOAP
- Re: Processing Instructions and SOAP
- Re: Processing Instructions and SOAP
- Re: Processing Instructions and SOAP
- Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?
- Processing Instructions and SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- Re: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- Re: Primer draft with GET Additions
- RE: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- Re: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- RE: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- Re: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- RE: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
Monday, 17 June 2002
- fyi: Summary of resolution to TAG Get finding
- RE: GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- GET, conneg, and a media type parameter
- Re: Primer draft with GET Additions
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Administrivia
- Re: [ice-dev] Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Administrivia
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
Sunday, 16 June 2002
- Re: Primer draft with GET Additions
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Primer draft with GET Additions
- Administrivia
- Re: Primer draft with GET Additions
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- 超值雙組合=駭客技術加新名單 sRhGCBYn4c1X9o9f
Friday, 14 June 2002
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: Web-friendly SOAP
Saturday, 15 June 2002
Friday, 14 June 2002
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- RE: Web-friendly SOAP
- Re: encodingStyle is a list of URIs in Envelope Schema
- Web-friendly SOAP
Thursday, 13 June 2002
Monday, 10 June 2002
Thursday, 6 June 2002
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
Wednesday, 5 June 2002
- RE: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwithHenrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwith Henrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updateddraftwith Henrik's option B)
- How To Secure Your Financial Future And Increase Your Income 15819
Tuesday, 4 June 2002
- Re: Republishing SOAP 1.1 schemas
- Re: Republishing SOAP 1.1 schemas
- Republishing SOAP 1.1 schemas
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draftwith Henrik's option B)
- Re: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draftwith Henrik's option B)
- Re: Root Attribute Still in SOAP 1.2?
Monday, 3 June 2002
- RE: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draftwith Henrik's option B)
- RE: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draft with Henrik's option B)
- RE: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draft with Henrik's option B)
- Root Attribute Still in SOAP 1.2?
- RE: List of outstanding issues regarding the RPC proposal
- List of outstanding issues regarding the RPC proposal
- Re: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draft with Henrik's option B
- [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draft with Henrik's option B)
- RE: [getf] Proposal for Web-friendly representation of RPC's in SOAP