RE: Proposal for naming the SOAP RPC return value

> From: Jacek Kopecky [mailto:jacek@idoox.com]

<snip/>

>  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>

The answer to my question seems trivially obvious to me, but just to be
sure, the example you cite of an RPC response for a void procedure with no
[in/out] or [out] parameters could also have been represented as:

<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" />
   </env:Body>
</env:Envelope>

Correct? (I just want to make sure no one is proposing precluding this
abbreviated syntax.)