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

SOAP 1.2 WSDL Binding

Expand Messages
  • keith_ballinger
    Hi All, We spoke a while back about the need to a SOAP 1.2 binding for WSDL. Here s my cut at what this may look like. Is there any objections to this? I ve
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 12, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi All,

      We spoke a while back about the need to a SOAP 1.2 binding for WSDL.
      Here's my cut at what this may look like. Is there any objections to
      this? I've tried to keep it as small as possible.

      You can find it in the files folder in word and HTML format.

      Thanks,
      Keith
    • Bob Cunnings
      Hi, The binding looks fine, but I have one concern... in the types section. Will the use of a WSDL 1.1 construct ( wsdl:arrayType ) to describe encoded
      Message 2 of 2 , Apr 12, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi,

        The binding looks fine, but I have one concern... in the "types" section. Will the use of a WSDL 1.1 construct ("wsdl:arrayType") to describe encoded arrays cause trouble, by virtue of the reference to the SOAP 1.1 attribute "soap-enc:arrayType"? I ask since SOAP 1.2 changes the way that arrays are serialized by SOAP encoding, and the "arrayType" attribute is replaced by "arraySize" and "itemType" [1].

        Should thought be given to including additional definitions for the SOAP 1.2 "arraySize" and "itemType" attributes, in the same way as that provided for "arrayType"? Of course this means changes that go beyond a new SOAP binding, "wsdl:arraySize" and "wsdl:itemType" would have to be defined. Or is there a better way?

        Of course the WSDL processor here could continue to process the wsdl:arrayType value in the schema, and apply the result to either SOAP version. But because SOAP 1.2 "arraySize" has syntax differences from the old SOAP 1.1 "asize" production, it seems cleaner to use additional attribute definitions, especially in the context of client generation from WSDL.

        OTOH, there's safety in doc/literal! Please let me know if I'm missing something.

        RC

        [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part2.html#complexenc


        > Hi All,
        >
        > We spoke a while back about the need to a SOAP 1.2 binding for WSDL.
        > Here's my cut at what this may look like. Is there any objections to
        > this? I've tried to keep it as small as possible.
        >
        > You can find it in the files folder in word and HTML format.
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Keith
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.