Re: [soapbuilders] Re: origin of interoperability problems?
> But therefore I wonder: given the importance that XSD bindings haveIt's being considered. Some problems are that the resulting subset
> for interoperability, how is that the WS-I BP doesn't put any limit
> into the XSD constructs?
might be useless and the WG would get mired down in political debates
(just like with the original schema WG). It might be simpler just to
encourage everyone to implement what was already agreed-to, the W3C spec.
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Simon Fell <ws@z...> wrote:
> >I've never personally had a dateTime problem, which in retrospect1. .net1.1 time assumes that times are in local tz, so if your service
> >surprises me. Our users have a lot of confusion about timezones, but
> >the interop is actually working the way it is supposed to.
> Steve Loughran has written a number of times about problems with
> dateTime, i've never fully understood the issue he talks about,
> although lots of users get confused over timezones, and whether there
> toolkit works with UTC or local times (as most platforms DateTime
> datatype typically doesn't retain TZ info).
is working w/ GMT zones then you only get interop problems in the GMT
2. Axis self tests were failing for me in the GMT0BST tz; nobody else
could see it. wierd.
3. I had an axis1.1 client/server where stuff was coming in a hour out
on 127.0.0.1 based communications.
Now, this is all in the past. Things may be fixed. Using time_t fixes
things for me too mostly, though you have other problems there (leap
seconds, the effect of the moon on the oceans, etc, etc). Try it and
see. But remember to test not just in different systems, but in boxes
(or at least virtual boxes) in different zones and locales.