[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Proposals to address SOAPAction header]
Chris is quite correct about the wording of option B. Since I had a hand in its preparation, let me interpret it a bit more. Deprecation means that some time in the future it MAY go away. In the meantime it is a recommendation that clients should not use it (but they can if they want to). On the server, it says that that the SOAP processor must not reject a message for whatever reason associated with the SOAPAction field - but of course if it uses the field then it is free to continue doing so. This gets round the problem of some SOAP processors issuing a fault if the SOAPAction field is not present. So regarding existing use of SOAPAction by SOAP 1.1 processors it is business as usual with the exception that they must not issue a fault if the SOAPAction is not there. John XML Technology and Messaging, IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park, Winchester, SO21 2JN Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188 (home) +44 (0)1722 781271 Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898 Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC