I am not an XML messaging guru, but SOAP 1.1
is an important protocol in practical terms.
There is a fair bit of use out there, even outside
the .NET framework. I view this is an opportunity
for SAML to demonstrate that it offers value for
securing messaging protocols. I would strongly
suggest we stay with SOAP.
- prateek
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Hal Lockhart [mailto:]
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:26 AM
>>To: 'Orchard, David';
>>Subject: RE: ISSUE:[UC-6-01:XMLProtocol]
>>
>>
>>I think the heart of the issue is "should we mandate support
>>for SOAP?" I am
>>not close to these efforts, but my impression is that SOAP is
>>an interim
>>thing which will go away soon. Please give us the benefit of
>>your knowledge
>>in this area.
>>
>>Hal
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Orchard, David [mailto:]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 10:06 PM
>>> To:
>>> Subject: ISSUE:[UC-6-01:XMLProtocol]
>>>
>>>
>>> There is no such deliverable as XML Protocol specification.
>>> We don't know
>>> when an XMLP 1.0 spec will ship. We can NEVER have forward
>>> references in
>>> specifications. When XMLP ships, we can easily change the
>>> requirements.
>>>
>>> There is SOAP 1.1.
>>>
>>> Dave Orchard
>>> XML Architect
>>> Jamcracker Inc., 19000 Homestead Dr., Cupertino, CA 95014
>>> p: 408.864.5118 m: 604.908.8425 f: 408.725.4310
>>>
>>> www.jamcracker.com - Sounds like a job for Jamcracker.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
>>> "unsubscribe" in the body to:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
>>"unsubscribe" in the body to:
>>
>>
