Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Mark Baker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.xml.distributed |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Anish, On 12/21/05, Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> wrote: > My understanding about SOAP MEP is that: it talks about SOAP messages. A > SOAP req-res MEP consists of one SOAP req and one SOAP res. In the case > of 202/204, there is no SOAP response although there is HTTP response. An HTTP response is a SOAP response. > Hence my discomfort about the name (SOAP req-res MEP with no SOAP res). > Alternately, specifying how the SOAP response is sent over a different > HTTP connection is not going into higher-level messaging pattern. It > would be merely specifying how the response part of the req-res SOAP MEP > is sent (I'm not sure if this is the best way to go, but I don't think > it is going into higher-level MEPs). I'd suggest that any other "response" would be handled as part of a separate message exchange. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com