W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > August 2001

RPCTF: Supplementary Quesstion/Issue on Issue 16 (void returns)

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:32:23 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F1925CB@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
[I'm resending this because although it now appears in the archives, I'm not
entirely sure that it ever got forwarded to list members - Stuart]

-----Original Message-----
From: Williams, Stuart 
Sent: 08 August 2001 11:38
To: 'xml-dist-app@w3.org'
Subject: RPCTF: Supplementary Quesstion/Issue on Issue 16 (void returns)


I haven't been tracking the RPC discussion closely and this may be a
non-problem. However, at thought/question was prompted by the wording in one
of Jacek recent postings (can't reference the archive at the moment).

<quote>
 j) RPC chapter says (roughly): "The first or otherwise specified
element inside the Body is the RPC element. The RPC element
contains child elements whose names match the names of the
arguments of the procedure (the first element in the response
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
being the return value, if the procedure has a return value). Each
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
argument element's child nodes (including the attributes) is
determined by the serialization of the value of the appropriate
argument.
</quote>

Issue 16 seems to be considering the representation of void returns in the
absense of [out] and/or [inout] parameters. 

The question that Jacek's "...if the procedure has a return value..."
wording prompted was, how are void returns represented in the *presense* of
[out] and/or [inout] parameters eg. for void MyProc(p1Type *p1). Possible
body child element responses might be:

	<ns:MyProcresponse>
		<return/>
		<p1>...</p1>
	</ns:<MyProcResponse>

or 

	<ns:MyProcresponse>
		<p1>...</p1>
	</ns:<MyProcResponse>

or something else?

A brief exchange with Jacek suggests that this question has not been address
yet.

Regards

Stuart
Received on Friday, 10 August 2001 05:32:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT