• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: SOAP and the Web
• From: "Mike Deem" <mikedeem@m...>
• Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:35:03 -0700
• Cc: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@l...>,<spolsky@p...>
• Thread-index: AcHtIwjPjaRbyQriTQqHq+bLja53JAAG64Sw
• Thread-topic: SOAP and the Web

> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]
> > But an URI with an HTTP GET isn't XML.
> 
> I think you have a very strange notion of what XML is.

When constructing a message, if I should not have to choose between
building an XML document and encoding the same information in an URL
with query string parameters. I should be able to do the same thing all
the time for every message.

> I'm sorry, Mike.  I asked for a technical defense of SOAP.  This is
just
> a feature-list with no comparison to other technical alternatives.  I
> send messages whose entire content is "still just XML" all the time,
> quite happily, with no SOAP suds.

OK. First, we should be clear about exactly what is being compared here.
Are we comparing SOAP to the ad-hock sending XML messages? Are we
comparing SOAP to DCOM, CORBA, or other RPC protocols? Are we comparing
SOAP to a more RESTful methodology?

  == Mike ==

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: SOAP and the Web
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: What is "the Web"
• Next by Date: Re: What is "the Web"
• Previous by thread: RE: SOAP and the Web
• Next by thread: RE: SOAP and the Web
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread