I've actually begun exploring this avenue. It is trivial to separate the wire format from the transport aspects of the specficiation. Once you've done that adding support, in the specification, for a new transport is just a matter of describing how the transport transfers messages in the XML-RPC wire format between clients and servers.
I was going to send my modified version of the spec to Dave Winer once I'm done adapting the SOAP profile for BEEP to XML-RPC, that would provide an example of a second transport mapping, to get his thoughts. If anyone else is interested let me know. I don't think abstracting the transport in the code would be too difficult. Once I have the XML-RPC profile implemented I'll be in a better position to judge. I think the key is to keep this very lightweight, i.e., do let it turn into another SOAP. ... WkH --- Ryan Hoegg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to > thinking. The XML-RPC > spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST > request. However when > I was looking around on the internet I remember > seeing stuff about > possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these > just ideas that were > being thrown around early on or are people still > interested in doing it > this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to > be reliant on HTTP. > > And if other transports are desirable, should we > abstract the transport > part? > > Just thinking out loud, > Ryan Hoegg > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/
