Re: Jabber Binding Supports Request/Response - existence proof of shared MEPs
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.xml.distributed |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > In recent discussions, some people have asserted that one measure of > benefit of having MEPs in SOAP is whether we've seen more than one binding > that supports the same MEP. I just checked and the draft Jabber binding > does, as I thought, support > http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/request-response/, the same > Request/Response pattern that's supported by our standard HTTP binding. > See [1]. Presumably, users will get the benefit of having a high degree > of similarity in the interfaces needed to support HTTP and Jabber. Yes, that seems like a good thing. > Interestingly, this also suggests that we'll have to coordinate with the > Jabber folks if we make the response envelope optional, drop the > Request/Response MEP entirely, etc. as their draft specification clearly > depends on our MEP in its current form. The Jabber folks are here, so you don't have far to look. :-) > Anyway, Jabber's use of our MEP reinforces my feelings that (a) MEPs as we > have them in SOAP are a good thing and practical to reuse and (b) that > others have dependencies on these aspects of our Recommendation and we > should proceed with great caution in making any changes. Agreed on both counts. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre Jabber Software Foundation http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml
smime.p7s
(application/x-pkcs7-signature, 3.6 KB) - not displayed