Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Here's another one: The HyperText Transfer Protocol gets used a lot for non-HyperText applications and based on the number of POST/cgi hacks floating around the internet, isn't always used for Transfer. Seriously, it's naive for someone to think that their protocol will be used in only the way they originally anticipate. People have done things neither Dave, Bob, Mohsen nor I ever expected with SOAP. Rather than stomp up and down in protest, I personally am glad people have taken an interest and want to evolve it. On a related note, one thing that has happened that I'm personally very happy about is now that SOAP's acronym status has been revoked, the protocol has become considerably simpler than earlier versions. Features I personally thought were criticial (e.g., SOAP/1.1 Section 5) have become fairly marginalized (and rightly so), whereas features I didn't originally care too much about (identifying intermediaries using URI rather than element QName) turn out to be pretty critical. DB -----Original Message----- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] Sent: Sun 2/9/2003 2:18 PM To: xml-dev@l... Cc: Subject: Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services At 9:01 PM +0000 2/9/03, Bill de hÃ?ra wrote: >Mike Champion wrote: >> (BTW, in 1.2 "SOAP" is no longer an acronym, reflecting the >>reality that SOAP never was an "access protocol" and does not >>really have all that much to do with "objects.") > >Or being simple :) > I'm feeling a little verklempt! Talk amongst yourselves..I'll give you a topic: the Simple Object Access Protocol is neither simple, nor an object access protocol. Discuss. :-) -- Rusty ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
