Re: SOAP 1.2? (was: issue: SOAP requirements)

[Dare Obasanjo <kpako@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Bill de hÓra wrote:
> 
> > 
> > We can do this without the SOAPAction in short
> order. 
> 
> It dawns on me that choosing SOAP 1.2 would make the
> draft very easy to 
> write. All interactions could be described as the
> product of the request 
> method and the media type, PUT/DELETE could be
> accomplished without a 
> base64 penalty by using MTOM (possibly).
> 
> I think this editorial strategy would be acceptable
> to REST-discuss 
> denizens and simultaneously prevent SOAP from
> appearing to be 
> second-class citizen.
> 
> Of course, I am just trying to make my life easier.
> Thoughts?

My first question would be how many deployed toolkits
actually support SOAP 1.2? 

We aren't using SOAP 1.2 yet at work since these
aren't showing up until Visual Studio 2005 which
hasn't shipped yet. 

THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #222
I reserve the right to execute any henchmen who appear to be a little too intelligent, powerful, or devious. However if I do so, I will not at some subsequent point shout "Why am I surrounded by these incompetent fools?!"


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/