- From: Stefan Haustein <haustein@kimo.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:33:58 -0400 (EDT)
- To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
- CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org, SOAP@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM, frankd@tibco.com
Jacek Kopecky wrote: > > Hello all. 8-) > The RPC Task Force has considered the issues #16 [1] and #113 > [2] and the feedback to the message [3] in the soapbuilders' list > (summarized in [4]) and proposes the following rewording of the > appropriate three bullets in SOAP version 1.2 section 7.1 [5] > (editors' draft) and adding the following examples and the ending > note. > > (...) > > The name of the return value accessor is "result" and it is > namespace-qualified with the namespace identifier > "http://www.w3.org/2001/06/rpc". The name of the struct is not > significant. However, a convention is to name it after the > procedure or method name with the string "Response" appended. Does any existing Sec 5 implementation with direct mapping to native types support universally scoped members of componound values? Wouldn't a simple convention "the name of the result element should be 'result' (unqualified)" sufficient? Let's keep the promise of the 'S' in SOAP and keep things simple. Although Sec 5 explicitly talks about globally scoped parts of complex values, I have never seen one, probably because most existing programming languages just do not support this kind of things. Promoting usage of exotic features will probably raise new compatibility issues. At least for kSOAP, supporting xyz:result would mean a lot of extra effort. Since kSOAP is supposed to be used in mobile devices this really scares me. I suggest to apply Occams razor and to remove the universally scoped accessors from componound types completely in 1.2. Best, Stefan -- Stefan Haustein Univ. Dortmund, FB 4, LS 8 tel: +49 231 755 2499 Baroper Str. 301 fax: +49 231 755 5105 D-44221 Dortmund (Germany) www-ai.cs.uni-dortmund.de
Received on Monday, 20 August 2001 11:35:15 UTC