Re: A viewpoint on harvesting REST
Mark Baker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:40:37PM -0700, David Orchard wrote: > I think there's a whole transport binding framework in SOAP 1.2 that allows > SOAP to be treated as a layer. You might disagree with it, but it's > certainly in the spec. No, I fully support the binding framework, but we stopped calling it the *transport* binding framework long ago, for good reason. It doesn't require that SOAP be a layer, though you're perfectly free to define a binding that treats it this way. For example, the way in which SOAP 1.0 used HTTP was done like this (200 response code for everything, including faults). Best current practice with bindings, as seen in the default HTTP binding, is to *integrate* SOAP with the underlying protocol, not layer it on top. The Web Method feature is the most obvious indication of this, but the use of HTTP response codes other than 200 also suggests it. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. [email protected] http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com