I definitely think we should mandate a SOAP 1.1 binding.
There has been no public statement (that I know of) from Microsoft or IBM
indicating that they will not ship a subsequent SOAP spec or discontinue
work on SOAP in favour of XMLP. This is an implicit assumption that has not
been explicitly stated.
I think if XMLP delivers a spec within a timely manner, this will be the
likely outcome. But there is no current XMLP spec that we could bind to.
That's what I mean by no such deliverable. It just ain't there yet, though
everybody wants it.
So we should mandate the thing that exists (SOAP 1.1), and re-open an
additional binding to something like xmlp once xmlp ships and appears to be
endorsed. For the same reasons that I don't endorse requirements containing
forward references to XMLE (which doesn't exist yet), I don't like forward
references to XMLP.
Cheers,
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hal Lockhart [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:26 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:
> >
> >
>
