• To: 'Bill de hÓra' <dehora@e...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>
• Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 19:03:06 -0600
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <001401c2133a$1e6176d0$887ba8c0@mitchum>
• Organization: DevelopMentor
• Reply-to: <aarons@d...>

> Aaron, I should qualify my question. To me, a messaging 
> framework means plumbing, an application protocol means 
> meaning. If you like, a messaging framework gets water 
> to my sink, an application protocol lets me decide on 
> temperature. If we have different understandings of the
> terms it's possible we're talking past each other.
> 
> Bill de hÓra

You're right. I admit I was overgeneralizing the similarities between
SOAP and HTTP. Paul's description of application protocols in relation
to SOAP has clarified the distinction in my mind: SOAP provides a
framework for defining application protocols like HTTP." Hence, the
similarities.

-aaron
http://staff.develop.com/aarons

• References:
  • RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>

• Prev by Date: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by Date: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Previous by thread: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by thread: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread