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

Re: [soapbuilders] Re: Literal, wsdl.exe, and SOAP Arrays

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Kulp
    Brad, XMLBus supports non-encoded arrays when in literal mode for the operations. I think there were a couple minor bugs in the last version relating to
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 4, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Brad,

      XMLBus supports non-encoded arrays when in "literal" mode for the
      operations. I think there were a couple minor bugs in the last version
      relating to literal support, but we should have a new version up in the
      next few hours that fixes them. Keep and eye on www.xmlbus.com.

      Thanks!

      --
      J. Daniel Kulp
      Principal Engineer
      IONA
      END 2 ANYWHERE
      P: 781-902-8727 C: 617-513-4582 F:781-902-8001
      daniel.kulp@...



      On Monday 04 February 2002 05:55, sound0 wrote:
      > Thank you for the clarification. Its all starting to make some sense!
      >
      > If this is the case, then I'm curious why most of the toolkits I've
      > seen only support SOAP encoded arrays for literal "use" if they are
      > actually not valid? Wouldn't this prevent interop with .Net services
      > that are document/literal (the default for ASP.NET) and use arrays ?
      >
      > If anyone knows of a Java toolkit that supports non-SOAP encoded
      > arrays, I'd love to hear about it.
      >
      > Thanks again for the responses.
      >
      >
      > -Brad
      >
      > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
      > > My understanding of WSDL Sec 2.2 for encoded types does not require
      >
      > that the
      >
      > > schema in 'types' guarantee a complete literal definition of the
      >
      > referenced
      >
      > > type, that using such type as literal (for SOAP encoded arrays)
      >
      > would not be
      >
      > > a validating schema for the type itself (assuming generalized
      >
      > convention for
      >
      > > type="prefix:ArrayOfXXX"). I would also tend to believe that the
      >
      > schema of
      >
      > > a literal element or type (of which literal 'type' does have some
      >
      > issues)
      >
      > > must be a validating schema for the element/type. Given the two
      > > aforementioned items the 'typical' ArrayOfXXX usage for
      >
      > encoded 'type' would
      >
      > > not guarantee a valid schema for a literal 'type.'...just my
      >
      > opinion.
      >
      > > Thoughts?
      > >
      > > Thx,
      > >
      > > -Matt Long
      > > Phalanx Systems, LLC
      > >
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From: Keith Ballinger [mailto:keithba@m...]
      > > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 1:38 AM
      > > > To: soapbuilders@y...; soapbuilders@y...
      > > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Literal, wsdl.exe, and SOAP Arrays
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > This is a great question!
      > > >
      > > > Short answer: I think it doesn't break the letter of the WSDL
      > > > spec to do this, but I do feel that it's breaking the spirit.
      > > >
      > > > Long answer: array type is an encoding-ism. Since doc/lit is
      > > > by definition the absense of an encoding, I'm not sure what
      > > > it would mean, semantically, that derives from SOAP array.
      > > > doc/lit means that the schema is the be all and end all of
      > > > the wire format, and the implementation is completely
      > > > uncoupled from that.
      > > >
      > > > I get the feeling I don't completely understand what you are
      > > > trying to do. Could you explain more what you are attempting
      > > > to describe in the WSDL, and how you want that to map to a
      > > > wire format?
      > > >
      > > > Thanks!
      > > > Keith
      > > >
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From: sound0 [mailto:brad_taylor@e...]
      > > > Sent: Thu 1/31/2002 1:16 PM
      > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
      > > > Cc:
      > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Literal, wsdl.exe, and SOAP Arrays
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Hello all:
      > > > I have a doc/literal wsdl that defines a type that
      > > > derives from SOAP
      > > > array (as descibed in WSDL sec 2.2). When I try to
      > > > consume it using
      > > > the .Net wsdl.exe, I get the following error:
      > > >
      > > > "Referenced type
      > > > 'http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/:Array'
      > > > valid only for encodied SOAP."
      > > >
      > > > As far as I can tell WSDL sec 2.2 doesn't seem to make
      > > > a distinction
      > > > between the use of SOAP arrays in encoded versus
      > > > literal styles. Is
      > > > this a known issue with .Net or am I committing some
      > > > terrible crime
      > > > that I'm unaware of?
      > > >
      > > > I know .Net supports arrays defined like this in a
      > > > doc/literal WSDL:
      > > >
      > > > <s:complexType name="ArrayOfFoo">
      > > > <s:sequence>
      > > > <s:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" name ="Foo"
      > > > type="foons:Foo" />
      > > > </s:sequence>
      > > > </s:complexType>
      > > >
      > > > But support for this style seems fairly sparse
      > > > (eventhough SOAP sec
      > > > 5.4.3 gives it a thumbs up).
      > > >
      > > > Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I checked the archives,
      > > > MSDN, and ASP.Net
      > > > newsgroups and didn't find anything.
      > > >
      > > > Thanks in advance for any comments or suggestions.
      > > >
      > > > -Brad
      > > >
      > > >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.