Attachments v URI

Hi 
all,

 

I am in favour of 
being able to use SOAP attachments for the Web service. I recognise the reasons 
which Stephen has mentioned in favour of URIs as being very valid but I think 
there are a couple of reasons why we should do both or SOAP attachments. The 
ideal from my perspective would be to do both.

 

With SOAP attachment 
we have a single call which submits the job or gets a quote and this also sends 
the file. With URI there may have to be an extra step where the file is placed 
at some address. This in my mind also lends itself to easier automation, but 
this might just be that the step of leaving a file to be accessed is 
eliminated.

 

There is a security 
issue in having a file somewhere on the Internet for collection. The FTP/ 
URI solution makes a lot of sense particularly with bigger files. However, 
our experience in using Web services at BGS is that the projects we were getting 
consisted of lots of small files rather than a small number of big ones. 

 

The other argument I 
would like to make is that I feel customers would have 
more confidence in the SOAP attachment solution. 

 

Thanks,

 

Peter.

 

Peter Reynolds, Software Development 
Manager
Bowne 
Global Solutions
3, West Pier 
Business Campus, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin, Ireland
Tel: 
+353-1-202-1280
Fax: +353-1- 202-1299
 

Web Site: http//www.bowneglobal.com
http://elcano.bowneglobal.com/