>>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?