W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Issue 231 options

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 15:30:02 -0400
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Cc: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF4E23CDE0.E0641162-ON85256C2F.006A2F24@lotus.com>

Jacek Kopecky writes:

>> Should SOAP Encoding serialization 
>> produce self-describing XML? 
>> (self-describing in terms of 
>> the data structure)

I think there's a variation of this goal that you don't cover, but it's 
the one I would like in principal if we could get there:

Should it be possible for an application to use SOAP Encoding 
serialization to produce self-describing            XML? (self-describing 
in terms of the data structure)

We got quite close in SOAP 1.1, and that was conscious.  So, and 
application CAN use xsi:type on all elements that are of simple type, but 
it need not if it prefers to rely on schemas or other external contracts 
to establish the interpretation of the contents.  It may be too late, and 
I've never pushed it, but I would like >>to be able to<< distinguish 
structs from arrays in a self-describing message, but that's not at all 
the same as saying that every serialization should be self-describing.

I'm not advocating any particular design decision at this point, just 
suggesting that the goal as I've stated it seems like a quite appealing 
middle ground between always self-desc. and "it's not always possible." 
Obviously, it's a matter of degree in any case.  Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 9 September 2002 15:31:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:11 GMT