- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 10:08:27 -0400
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Cc: moreau@crf.canon.fr, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
History: FWIW, I was involved in consideration of this issue for the design of 1.1. There, we explicitly decided that a receiver was expected to understand the QName in the body, and from that would understand any conventions associated with the use of that body. I agree with Henrik that it's circular (and unnecessary) to model a misunderstood Body QName differently for RPC than for any other use of the Body. Not recognizing that it's a purchase order (presumed message style) is no different than not recognizing getStockQuote (presumed RPC style), IMO. Only when you recognize it do you understand whether there are good mappings to the RPC method/args style (and as Henrik points out, the degree to which you actually do a nice binding to a programming language is completely private to your endpoint.) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 3 May 2002 10:26:45 UTC