Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> From: Adam Turoff [mailto:ziggy@p...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:39 PM > To: Michael Kay > Cc: 'Joshua Allen'; xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: What does SOAP really add? > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 03:23:07PM +0100, Michael Kay wrote: > > Correct. The XSLT 2.0 requirements have been published for at > least a year > > and if I recall correctly no-one has asked for this feature. > > One of Joshua's comments got me thinking. Which is *more* broken: > SOAP or XSLT? That is, is it a misfeature of XSLT that document() > can't send SOAP requests, or that idempotent SOAP requests don't > use a simple GET? I ask that rhetorically not to ascribe blame, but > to understand the issue more fully. > > That leads to another question: is the lack of POST/PUT/DELETE > support with XSLT simply an oversight? Or is there a well thought I think XSLT 2.0's feature for multiple output documents would use PUT on http: URLs. > out reason why XSLT's document() function is limited to GET requests? > (And should this discussion be added to the XSLT 2.0 REC?) > > Certainly, there are many ways to fix this problem. If the only > issue were the ability to issue SOAP messages within XSLT stylesheets, > then some simple extension could be put forth and standardized > solve this particular issue. But that wouldn't address the lack > of POST/PUT/DELETE requests, nor would it speak to the need to > add/ignore such features from XSLT. I'm not sure why you would want a tree transformation language to be able to *delete* resources...
|
