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

Proposal for naming the SOAP RPC return value

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:07:47 +0200 (CEST)
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <SOAP@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM>, <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
cc: <frankd@tibco.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108172053200.5793-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Hello all. 8-)
 The RPC Task Force has considered the issues #16 [1] and #113
[2] and the feedback to the message [3] in the soapbuilders' list
(summarized in [4]) and proposes the following rewording of the
appropriate three bullets in SOAP version 1.2 section 7.1 [5]
(editors' draft) and adding the following examples and the ending
note.
 This proposal is based on solution #3 from the message [4] but
it solves the possibility of naming conflicts.


-------------------------- proposal begins

 - An RPC response is modeled as a struct.
 - The response is viewed as a single struct containing an
accessor for the return value and each [out] or [in/out]
parameter. The accessors for the parameters SHOULD be in the same
order as in the procedure or method signature, with the return
value accessor being the first.
 - Each parameter accessor has a name corresponding to the name of
the parameter and type corresponding to the type of the parameter.
The name of the return value accessor is "result" and it is
namespace-qualified with the namespace identifier
"http://www.w3.org/2001/06/rpc". The name of the struct is not
significant. However, a convention is to name it after the
procedure or method name with the string "Response" appended.


 An example of an envelope with a simple successful RPC response:

<env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-envelope">
  <env:Body>
    <m:GetLastTradePriceResponse
          env:encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-encoding"
          xmlns:m="http://example.org/2001/06/quotes"
          xmlns:r="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/rpc">
      <r:result>34.1</r:result>
    </m:GetLastTradePriceResponse>
  </env:Body>
</env:Envelope>

 An example of an envelope with a successful RPC response of a
void procedure with no [in/out] or [out] parameters:

<env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-envelope">
  <env:Body>
    <m:SetDateResponse
         env:encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-encoding"
         xmlns:m="http://example.org/2001/06/clock" >
    </m:SetDateResponse>
  </env:Body>
</env:Envelope>

 An example of an envelope with a successful RPC response of a
procedure with a return value and an [out] parameter:

<env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-envelope">
  <env:Body>
    <m:GetLastTradePriceResponse
          env:encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-encoding"
          xmlns:m="http://example.org/2001/06/quotes"
          xmlns:r="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/rpc">
      <r:result>34.1</r:result>
      <StockName>Foo, inc.</StockName>
    </m:GetLastTradePriceResponse>
  </env:Body>
</env:Envelope>

 An example of an envelope with a successful RPC response of a
procedure with no return value and two [out] parameters:

<env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-envelope">
  <env:Body>
    <m:GetLastTradePriceResponse
          env:encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-encoding"
          xmlns:m="http://example.org/2001/06/quotes"
          xmlns:r="http://www.w3.org/2001/06/rpc">
      <Price>34.1</Price>
      <StockName>Foo, inc.</StockName>
    </m:GetLastTradePriceResponse>
  </env:Body>
</env:Envelope>


 Please note that according to the SOAP Encoding rules [6], rule
no. 9 (the very last in section 5.1), a procedure with a void
return type is serialized equally to a procedure with a non-void
return type but with a NULL return value.

-------------------------- proposal ends

 This proposal directly resolves issues #16 and #113.

 We believe that this proposal is fully consistent with the
encoding rules of SOAP section 5.

 The RPC Task force is likely to put this proposal forward to the
XMLP Working Group for decision, and so your feedback can make a
difference.

 Please send your replies to the list xml-dist-app@w3.org.

 As usual, we will take silence for assent after a reasonable
time so please voice your opinion soon.


                            Jacek Kopecky

                            Idoox
                            http://www.idoox.com/


[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x16
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x113
[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soapbuilders/message/4907
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Aug/0131.html
[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-20010709/#_Toc478383533
[6] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/06/01/soap-02-infoset.html#encrules
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 18:07:50 GMT

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