attachment-0001

Actually, I think that DIME had more momentum at one point but I believe the focus is now on SOAP w/attachments (including Microsoft and IBM). <tt>> > http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jeffsch/paswa/paswa61.html > > http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jeffsch/paswa/paswa61.pdf > > http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/jeffsch/paswa/paswa62.doc </tt>---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM Printing Systems ---------------------------------------------- <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <td>"REVEL,DAN (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <dan_revel@hp.com> 03/19/2003 10:21 AM <td>                To:        Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, ps@pwg.org         cc:                 Subject:        RE: PS> Soap with attachments - relation to SOAP 1.1</table> SOAP-attachments was a W3C submission, Microsoft et al. made a competing proposal, DIME, that seems to have more momentum:   <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwebsrv/html/dimewsattch.asp">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwebsrv/html/dimewsattch.asp</a>     -----Original Message----- From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 9:59 AM To: ps@pwg.org Subject: PS> Soap with attachments - relation to SOAP 1.1 See <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments">http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments</a> section 4. Seems this has been around for quite a while. I suspect we'd have better interop than we anticipate. ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM Printing Systems ----------------------------------------------