Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [soapbuilders] Support for the BDG

Expand Messages
  • Dave Winer
    ... If it specifies a *subset* of one of these standards, it s OK. Is this your intent? Yes, and drop the imho part. We re defining an easy path through the
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 31 8:16 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      >>If SOAP BDG *conflicts* with any of these standards, it's a bug (IMHO).
      If it specifies a *subset* of one of these standards, it's OK. Is this your
      intent?

      Yes, and drop the imho part. We're defining an easy path through the
      standards, not trying to replace or obfuscate the standards.

      About the list of pledges, thanks for volunteering. I'd like to include in
      the soapware.org directory if possible.

      BTW, it's worth mentioning that the soapware.org directory can be included
      in other directories. It's available in OPML as well.

      http://www.soapware.org/discuss/reader$4.opml

      Some days I think if only the IBM/Microsoft guys would 2click on that,
      they'd find that there's a simple XML format that can do wonderful things to
      simplify all the work they're doing on aggregators and metadata, and it's
      easy to write user-oriented authoring tools (we have one). UDDI could be a
      four-screen spec too. Maybe we'll go there next. ;->

      To Josh, there's a philosophy here. It's not Microsoft's philosophy, but
      with the power of your developers, if we could get you guys to come out and
      play openly, you could tap into the experience we have and vice versa. This
      is the argument we've been having. Josh reads our specs, he knows what we're
      doing, so it's puzzling to me that he would impugn evil intent. I work so
      openly, the ideas just must be strange. How could I be willing to give them
      something for free without somehow poisoning them?

      Dave
    • Rich Salz
      ... For what it s worth ... we re building a commercial product, building security net services. We re neither general infrastructure nor open source.
      Message 2 of 5 , Mar 31 8:28 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        > About the list of pledges

        For what it's worth ... we're building a commercial product, building
        security net services. We're neither general infrastructure nor open
        source. Having said that, our interfaces our SOAP over HTTP and
        HTTP/SSL, and we intend to comply with the BDG soap profile. While some
        folks (myself included) have pointed out the risks in this effort --
        frankly, I still don't see the need to close the spec in a few hours --
        overall it seems like a good thing. Congrats.
        /r$
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.