- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:30:19 +0600
- To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: "WS Description WG" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
"Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com> writes: > > 2. WS-I doesn't seem to support SOAP Encoding in their activities, and > if I understand you correctly, they are in fact creating their own graph > encoding. It is understandable for them, but I don't think it is > possible for WSDL 1.2 not to support SOAP Encoding properly, since SOAP > Encoding is part of SOAP 1.2 - the product of a peer W3C Working Group - > and the WS-Desc WG has sent no comments against SOAP Encoding in the > Last Call phase. I would personally like to support SOAPEnc, but I'm greatly pained by the cost of use=encoded .. and the fact that it leads to doubling the variations of WSDLs possible for a given service. I think you would agree that the non-graph part of soap-enc can be reasonably covered by literal, right? In fact, most of the impls already basically assuem that .. for example by ignoring attributes in schemas. (Apparently Axis and the JAX-RPC ref impl both do that.) The question then is where the graph use-case falls in the 80-20 split. Also, SOAP 1.2 did make that an optional part of the spec. Sanjiva.
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2002 09:32:04 UTC