[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> From: Didier PH Martin [mailto:martind@netfolder.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 8:38 PM
> To: Julian Reschke; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] What does SOAP really add?
>
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> Julian said:
> > Well, then that's the server's fault, not XSLT's, right?
>
> Didier replies:
> or XSLT fault is to count on an abstract URI that does not exist
> yet. Thus,
> what's missing if we say that only HTTP GET can fetch document is a URI
> sufficiently complete to allow us to express most of the queries
> we need. If
> we bring this URI form ether to reality then, neither XSLT nor HTTP is
> bugged.
>
> Julian said:
> > Right now, there isn't a SEARCH method -- just a (private)
> internet draft.
> > Guess what? I'm really considering to follow what Mark has proposed
> (letting
> > the method create a new resource from which the query result can be
> obtained
> > using GET).
>
> Didier replies:
> Right, this is contained in a draft document not a private one since the
> document's copyright is owned by the Internet society (ref:
> http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-latest.html_.
I meant it's a private -- not a Working Group -- draft.
> For those of you not aware of IETF methodology, drafts precede
> RFCs are used
> as discussion basis (i.e. intemediary documents). Then, let's
> then speak of
> the PROPFIND method which is part of the WebDAV RFC (ref:
> http://www-old.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/protocol/rfc2518.pdf). What is
> returned is an XML document. You can off course say that PROPFIND
> is illegal
> ;-) in that case, what's missing is a URI that allow us to
> express the same
> versatility that an HTTP post allow us. Suggestions?
Dan Conolly has already suggested something. I feel it would be extremely
useful to have (not to replace PROPFIND but to "enhance" it).
|
