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

5230Re: [decentralization] Re: xml protocols and transport bindings

Expand Messages
  • Paul Prescod
    Feb 3, 2002
      allenjswa wrote:
      > > sufficient trouble with simple SOAP over HTTP that I haven't even
      > > able ot try it.
      > >
      > What have you had trouble with?

      Different clients and servers generate different versions of namespace

      For example: http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/ versus
      http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope .

      And of course encoding and schema namespaces have also changed.

      Null/nil handing is not compatible depending on what version of SOAP the
      client/server implement.

      There are a variety of conventions for SOAPAction.

      Some implementations don't handle complex types.

      At least one implementation doesn't handle namespaces correctly.

      > ... I have never *not* had SOAP work
      > when I tried to call various methods at XMethods or web services I
      > develop myself.

      I guess we have had different experiences. Time will tell.

      > You already have the answer. It's a message format that can be used
      > (and is used) in things like "dcom for the web" and "asynchronous
      > rpc". You can confuse yourself if you want, but it is not that
      > confusing.

      If SOAP is a message format, then why does it need complex data
      structuring conventions? Wouldn't a message format usually leave that in
      the domain of the application? Also, if it is a *format* then why does
      it need to have anything to say about whether it is used for RPC or
      asynch or ... usually the message pattern is the domain of the protocol,
      not the format. Most of that stuff has been moved to a separate
      specification from the envelope part so there are moves towards
      rationality. Maybe the non-envelope bits could also be renamed.

      Paul Prescod
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic