Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46300 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2004 04:47:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Jul 2004 04:47:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 27003 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2004 04:47:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 26697 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2004 04:47:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 26687 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jul 2004 04:47:35 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [216.254.0.205] (HELO mail5.speakeasy.net) (216.254.0.205) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 21:47:32 -0700 Received: (qmail 23345 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2004 04:47:26 -0000 Received: from adsl-64-166-4-1.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO [172.16.31.104]) (pietro@[64.166.4.1]) (envelope-sender ) by mail5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 27 Jul 2004 04:47:26 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) In-Reply-To: <200101c47382$91c228e0$2e694109@LANKABOOK> References: <13F7811C-DF4F-11D8-AF9E-000A95AF91FC@axonstudios.net> <200101c47382$91c228e0$2e694109@LANKABOOK> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <0BB58C11-DF88-11D8-AF9E-000A95AF91FC@axonstudios.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Peter Molettiere Subject: Re: Patch: fix for firewall issue Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 21:47:21 -0700 To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Jul 26, 2004, at 7:36 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > To me a big value of open source as it relates to (open) standards is > that the open source project can support strict adherance to standards. Sure, I totally agree with you here. Standards make our lives not only much easier, but they make thing possible that just wouldn't be otherwise. > We didn't write that into the SOAP 1.1 spec - it requires it. If we > bend the rules then we're encouraging loose interpretation of the spec. Here I think we get to the nub of the issue -- the spec should be implemented as closely to what is written as possible. But making software interoperate with other non-compliant devices and software is sometimes desirable. > then where will it stop. Just imagine what the Web would be like today > if Apache HTTPD had been loosy goosey about how it interpreted the HTTP > protocol? (Or if it supported attempts and embracing and extending the > protocol?) No one is talking about being loosey goosey with how the protocol is interpreted. And, using Apache httpd as the example, there are definite places where slight accommodations were made in that product to ensure interoperability with non-compliant software, like IE. > Exactly and thank you for sending it and pointing it out. This to me is > the other power of open source - you can go fix it to suit your needs > yourself. If you had been using some proprietary software from MSFT > or IBM or Sun or whoever, then you'd be up a creak. Totally agreed! Which is why we try as much as possible not to use such proprietary software. We are definitely happy to be using axis -- please don't take my creaking otherwise. --Peter