• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, 'xml-dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: SOAP and the Web
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 13:01:22 -0500

That is why I am trying to establish which 
engineering features have the potential for 
creating path dependencies and what degree. 
Then the business decisions are clearer. To 
do that, one must compare the payoffs of each 
choice.  I have to discard Fielding's 
"unforeseen benefits" because while one 
can sell a car by telling the buyer it will 
get them laid, one doesn't write that into 
the contract.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

On Wed, 2002-05-01 at 13:49, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> The market could do as you suggest and flock to SOAP 
> based on ease.  It wouldn't be the first time.  But 
> is it the duty of the TAG to warranty an architecture 
> based on ease, or should they warranty only the architecture 
> designed with 'safety in mind' or whatever criteria are 
> chosen?  

I think we need to know whether this is an engineering discussion or a
business discussion to figure out which criteria are important.

• Prev by Date: RE: New XSLT, XPath, and XQuery drafts - but still no update?
• Next by Date: XML Schema Languages - Presentation by Eric van der List
• Previous by thread: Re: SOAP and the Web
• Next by thread: RE: SOAP and the Web
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread