- From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 09:55:22 -0800
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I think we would be better off reserving "representation" for its very important job as the concrete instance returned when we request a "resource". Since SOAP generally instructs the receiver rather than satisfying its request, I believe that this line of analysis will lead to madness: we have to argue about who is the requester, what resource is represented, which URI does it satisfy, etc. little of which bears upon messaging. Your proposal can be simpler without "representation": "A SOAP Message contains a SOAP envelope with application/soap+xml content type and binding-specific additional data reachable along some path of references rooted in the SOAP envelope.". At 07:18 AM 2/4/2003 -0800, David Orchard wrote: >Maybe a good word for the bag of bits that some are calling a message would >be better served being called a representation? This would show a clean >relationship between the web and web services at the messaging level. The >TAG's work [1] isn't very far along, but it shows a start. > >And if we don't a call a "message" a representation, then we probably ought >to provide some explanation on how a message and a representation relate. >It might be as simple as "A SOAP Message is defined as a representation that >contains a SOAP envelope, binding specific additional data, and has the >application/soap+xml content type". > >Cheers, >Dave > >http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#representations > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org > > [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of Jean-Jacques Moreau > > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 12:30 AM > > To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com > > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org > > Subject: Re: What is a SOAP Message > > > > > > > > I also make the same distinction between messages and envelopes. > > I have seen the confusion made in other groups as well. So, > > > > +1 to your suggested clarification. > > > > Jean-Jacques. > > > > noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > > > During today's AFTF telcon we got into a discussion as to > > exactly what a > > > SOAP Message is. Gudge pointed out that in several places > > in part 1 it > > > says or strongly implies that a SOAP Message >is< an XML > > Envelope Infoset. > > > I had always assumed we were clear that the "term message" > > refers not just > > > to the envelope, but to a set of information which includes > > at minimum the > > > envelope, but often other information as well (e.g., the destination > > > address, WebMethod, and Action tend to be sent out of band > > in SOAP http). > > > [...] > > > > > > I think it's useful and appropriate to separate the term > > "message" from > > > "envelope". [...] I think we should consider clarifying our > > terminology. > > ______________________________________________________ John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2003 13:10:17 UTC