ebxml-msg — archive

Re: Use of MIME multipart for zero payload containers

From: System
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 10:27:00 -0000

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:07:23 -0500 From: "David Fischer" <[email protected]> Doesn't zero payloads mean SOAP 1.1 rather than SOAP w/ Attachments since there are no attachments? Well, I think it's usually cleaner for two parties to agree that, at a certain layer, they are using one particular protocol (e.g. "SOAP 1.1 with Attachments"). It's sort of unfortunate (error-prone, etc) if they have to say "at this layer, we sometimes talk protocol X and other times talk protocol Y, and the receiver of a message must "sniff" it to see which protocol it conforms to. In my opinion, the "SOAP 1.1 with Attachments" protocol spec ought to clearly state how to transmit a SOAP message with zero attachments, rather than just abdicating and saying that it can't handle it. Again, I don't think I can tell what the protocol spec is actually saying.