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

RE: literal XML encoding?

From: Keith Ballinger <keithba@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:15:57 -0700
Message-ID: <8E937B8C67213B41BB5C87E2C6FCC22301FB23E7@red-msg-29.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <francis@redrice.com>, "Marc J. Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
.NET Web Services omits an encoding style for literal XML.

-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Norton [mailto:francis@redrice.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:51 AM
To: Marc J. Hadley
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject: Re: literal XML encoding?

"Marc J. Hadley" wrote:
> The actual value of the encodingStyle attribute can be anything you
> 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

Received on Thursday, 24 May 2001 13:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:13 UTC