Re: how bad is soap?

[Frank Strauss <strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>]

Hi!

Keith> The use of WSDL, of course, would not necessarily limit the
Keith> netconf protocol to SOAP and HTTP.  WSDL currently enables
Keith> describing bindings to SOAP (over HTTP), MIME (over SMTP I
Keith> assume, haven't read much about this) and one other protocol, I
Keith> believe.  WSDL is extensible, though, and I see no reason why
Keith> bindings to BEEP could not be written.  What would be needed,
Keith> however, is a W3C document explaining how to include a BEEP
Keith> binding in a WSDL document, and what the information in such a
Keith> binding would mean in a real implementation.  Then, the people
Keith> who build WSDL stub compilers and tool sets could start adding
Keith> support for BEEP to their tools and we could eventually
Keith> leverage that.  Is something like this on the road map for
Keith> BEEP?

The thing that "would be needed" here could (and IMHO should) be SOAP
and not some other re-invention. The mapping of SOAP on BEEP is
defined in RFC 3288.

 -frank

--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>