[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: issue: SOAP requirements

To: Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: issue: SOAP requirements
From: Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:05:44 -0800
Cc: atom-protocol@xxxxxxx, Dare Obasanjo <kpako@xxxxxxxxx>, Janne Jalkanen <jalkanen@xxxxxxxxx>, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa <miyagawa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, jasnell@xxxxxxxxx, Joe Gregorio <joe.gregorio@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <423B1760.9040704@franklinmint.fm>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-protocol.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-protocol-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <423B1760.9040704@franklinmint.fm>
Sender: owner-atom-protocol@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On Mar 18, 2005, at 10:01 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:

be productive by helping in
fleshing out what is currently an underspecified
aspect of the spec.
Hmm. Well, the first order of business would seem to be choosing SOAP 1.1 or SOAP 1.2. It's hard to evaluate the SOAP requirement in any way before we have a more concrete idea of what we want.

+1 -Tim

References:
- Re: issue: SOAP requirements
  - From: Dare Obasanjo
- Re: issue: SOAP requirements
  - From: Robert Sayre

Prev by Date: Re: issue: SOAP requirements
Next by Date: Re: issue: SOAP requirements
Previous by thread: Re: issue: SOAP requirements
Next by thread: Re: issue: SOAP requirements
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread