W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Issues 12 & 192 (long)

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 15:48:50 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203312048.PAA02738@markbaker.ca>
To: LMM@acm.org
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org

> In the case of SOAP-over-HTTP, you've gone beyond relying
> on the 500 Server Error to signal anything having to do
> with SOAP faults, and now you're arguing about whether
> it's reasonable to ALSO use "500 server error" in the
> cases where the SOAP layer is signalling a SOAP fault.

By your examples, you appear to be assuming that SOAP is being layered
on top of HTTP, by comparing it to HTTP's relationship to TCP and
DECnet.  This is what we have referred to as the "tunnel use" of SOAP.

In the "chameleon use" of SOAP, the relationship between SOAP and HTTP
is not one of layering, but one of extension (i.e. both work together at
the application layer).  In this use, SOAP very closely resembles
PEP[1], though of course the envelope and processing model remain
independant of any specific application protocol.

 [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-http-pep

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2002 15:45:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:48 UTC