W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2003

Re: WSDL 1.2 drops use="encoded"

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 21:32:07 -0500 (EST)
To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0303022127370.26342-100000@smtp.datapower.com>

The definitive tone of Don's message made me go back and re-read the
proposal.  I still think I'm right.  If only "literal" is supported, than
the message schema must exactly describe the message: no multiref strings,
etc., unless explicit encoded into the schema.  Is that correct?

If I have an operation
    int foo(const char* a, const char* b)
then using SOAP encoding, the body would look like
   <SOAP:Body>
    <foo xmlns="....">
     <a href="#b"/>
     <b>cloned string</b>
   </foo>

But the schema would look like foo as a complex element with sub-elements
a and b as xsd:string.

Doesn't this become impossible with "encoded" is dropped?  Even if "this"
just means the paragraph before this one?
	/r$
Received on Sunday, 2 March 2003 21:32:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:13 GMT