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

Re: SOAP 1.2?

To: mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: SOAP 1.2?
From: Dare Obasanjo <kpako@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 05:05:17 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Bill de "hÓra" <bill@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@xxxxxxx>, Joe Gregorio <joe.gregorio@xxxxxxxxx>, Janne Jalkanen <jalkanen@xxxxxxxxx>, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa <miyagawa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, jasnell@xxxxxxxxx, atom-protocol@xxxxxxx
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=E1P9zNSimvzG6ZhZIg4sCVvgzU/qAtKo7dZkJceqDT1nHShK6nWS6hbpmyyqnktzIf3ppy1XNt/NdrJBz0Lqtf0ZozcW0CACOSfRBEDmDHfsp/MMlX1UyTV5rYdDEo0Wy5B0mD6cxl2qfx7bjHMxHweLeNvc9SaUqDXcZIeYkX0= ;
In-reply-to: 6667
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>
Sender: owner-atom-protocol@xxxxxxxxxxxx

--- Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Point taken, but there are problems with SOAP 1.1 as
> well. For instance, 
> it's not a W3C-Rec.
> 
> "This document is a NOTE made available by the W3C
> for discussion only. 
> Publication of this Note by W3C indicates no
> endorsement by W3C."
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/soap/
> 
> I'm not sure we could normatively cite SOAP 1.1 if
> we wanted to :/

What is the official IETF policy on citing normative
sources? 

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/

Prev by Date: Re: SOAP 1.2?
Previous by thread: Re: SOAP 1.2? (was: issue: SOAP requirements)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread