RE: ISSUE:[UC-6-01:XMLProtocol]

Hi,

	Most probably (looking at the future without the benefit of a crystal ball)
SOAP and later XMLP would be the most widely used protocols. As our
assertions and exchange protocols are transport agnostic, I do not see any
need to "mandate" any support.

	But our bindings section and also the guidance section could emphasis use
of SOAP and XMLP (as an addendum when it is a W3C note).

cheers

|-----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:
|> 
|>
|
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
|"unsubscribe" in the body to: 
|