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

Re: Simple question about lists / arrays / sequences

Expand Messages
  • tim_ewald
    ... There is no WS-I FUD about RPC. The WS-I Basic Profile allows RPC/literal as well as document/literal services and either can be mapped to an RPC
    Message 1 of 8 , May 31 2:00 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com, Glen Daniels <glen@t...> wrote:

      There is no WS-I FUD about RPC. The WS-I Basic Profile allows
      RPC/literal as well as document/literal services and either can be
      mapped to an RPC programming model. What the BP disallows is SOAP
      encoding, and we should be clear about why. Nothing in SOAP encoding
      is intrinsically bad. The problem is really that WSDL describes
      encoded interfaces using XSD. Since XSD is based on a tree of
      (typically) named nodes and the SOAP data model that is the
      foundation for encoding is based on a graph of unnamed structures,
      and there is no specification that says how to treat the former as
      the latter, there's a problem there. For instance, what is the SOAP
      encoding for an XSD element substitution group? One could argue that
      that case would never arise, but since WSDL didn't restrict what
      parts of XSD could be used with an encoded service, you have to
      consider about the possibility. If the BP group's charter had
      allowed it to produce new things instead of just narrowing existing
      things, it might have written either a SOAP data model description
      language or the subset of XSD for use with encoding. But since it
      could do neither, it dropped encoding altogether. Anyway, none of
      that stops you from using RPC/literal or doc/literal services as an
      RPC mechanism, which is what many toolkits do today.

      Tim-

      > I guess the WS-I type FUD about RPC is going to keep XML-RPC alive
      > forever, though. :) It's too bad, because the SOAP 1.2 graph
      data
      > encoding is really not bad at all.
      >
      > --Glen
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.