RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s act
I don't disagree. But if you have to send the intent, pick one. Our lives are simpler and longer if we can agree on basic gestures when downing a mammoth or deciding which of us gets to talk to the red-haired girl first. len -----Original Message----- From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@A...] > From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] <snip/> > We are about to walk straight back into the Doctype over PI > over attvalue in the root discussion. Well, since I am firmly in the camp of insisting there is no inherent doctype in a document, I should emphasize that the "intent" of a message is not something inherent in the syntax of a message viewed in isolation. However, a document has no notion of a corresponding response, either, yet web services need such a correlation. Web services need abstractions that go beyond the syntax of a document viewed in isolation, and when considered in this context, a message needs a way to convey an intent that is not simply up to the interpretation of any consumer. I don't think you can completely decouple the intent of a message at the web service layer from syntactic constructs used to convey that intent. One can certainly debate, though, over the mechanisms used to convey that intent.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format