>>contaminated? In wich way? I don't see your point.
>
>Use of HTTP headers to carry information that should go in the SOAP envelope (cf. Michel's
first article on this issue).
Well I think is clear that they are different things
>I wouldn't insist in
SOAP3 designation. There is not such a thing, even in MS terminology.
Till now is SOAP3 Beta, I suppose this will be the final name but I don't care if MS calls it SOAPX7 or whaterver, the fact is that is there.
>Is this a better way? I don't think so. If we do not aim at interoperability, why would we use SOAP in the first place?
So what you will use instead of SOAP? What's wrong with SOAP?