Re: literal XML encoding?

"Marc J. Hadley" wrote:
> 
> 
> The actual value of the encodingStyle attribute can be anything you wish
> provided it is a URI. It might be a URL within your organisations
> domain, e.g. in your case you might choose
> http://www.redrice.com/literalxmlencoding or something along those
> lines. The SOAP processor doesn't expect to find anything at this URL,
> it is just used as a unique identifier for your encoding.
> 
Thank you for this. 

I see that an alternative is to use
"http://xml.apache.org/xml-soap/literalxml" as an informal standard.

And another alternative appears to be using not using an encodingStyle
atteibute at all, as in UDDI.

> See section 4.1.1 of the SOAP/1.1 specification.
> 

Why does it need encoding at all? What could be more natural than
embedding a well-formed XML fragment in an XML message structure?

And if it does need encoding, why is there no standard way of specifying
this?

Francis.