Hi Anne, > POX doesn't imply just supporting POST. POX simply means that you are > formatting the payload as plain XML, without a separate envelope.
Agreed but POX folks usually ignore GET, which is silly .. or they have a separate vision for how to process GET. In Axis2 we're *very* clear about how we think about it: its the way WSDL 2.0 thinks about it. Since I've been a part of both I'm of course of the mindset WSDL 2.0 got that bit right too ;-). > If > you need to pass additional system-levle information, that should be > specified in the HTTP header or the MIME header. Of course if you can't live within the standard HTTP header set and the standard MIME type system then you have to get industry consensus on those extensions to get interoperability. Remember HTTPR? If the basic HTTP structures suffice then POX is a great thing. If you need to intro headers to say what the signature is for example then I don't see why that buys *any* value over SOAP .. which is basically a standardized bag for putting any kind of extension like that in a well-known place. > Sometimes POX is > RESTful, and sometimes it isn't. That's an issue of design, not > protocols. +1. > Note that a lot of folks that are campaigning against WS-* for its > complexity (e.g., Tim Bray) are not proposing REST as an alternative > -- just POX. Of course. But its also important to understand that these are not all purely technically motivated arguments .. *if* the problem space sits within what's solved by HTTP and HTTPS then POX is great (and is what MUST be used .. because of the incredible interop that implies). > > Now you've drunk too much REST coolaid Anne ;-) .. MIME is not self > > describing when it comes to XML .. saying application/xml simply isn't > > enough to "describe" the XML; you do need a schema of some sort. > > Ah ... but you don't have to use application/xml. You can define your > own MIME type to type the specific document. And you don't have to > register a MIME type in order to use it. Yes you can .. application/x-foo or x-foo/y-bar. However, you need to get the other side to understand and accept those too .. and of course welcome to a new (ugly) standards battle. Mark Baker and the other RESTafarians don't advocate this approach because its not interoperable. (BTW are you on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list? New battleground, same battle .. why WSDL sucks and why you need a new thing, which of course must be kept secret because otherwise someone will use it and get coupled. &^$%#W$%^&[EMAIL PROTECTED]) Sanjiva. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
