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

Re: issue 78

From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 06:55:09 -0400
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: Frank DeRose <frankd@tibco.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF7472926.D3DDE773-ON85256A6C.003BB398@raleigh.ibm.com >
Yes it does allow it, but it says that it isn't going to
talk about it [1] (look for boxcarring).  I believe it is
valid to put multiple RPC calls in the body (each one being
its own body element) - if fact you can even put each RPC
as a separate header - there are lots of ways to do it.
But, the spec doesn't tell you how to handle things like
faults (or multiple faults) or rollback if the 3rd rpc
fails.  So, if someone wants to do this it would be up
to them to decide how these issues are handled - as long
as they conform to the spec.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/06/01/xmlp-soap-02.html#_Toc478383487

"Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>@w3.org on 06/15/2001 03:41:58

Sent by:  xml-dist-app-request@w3.org

To:   Frank DeRose <frankd@tibco.com>
cc:   xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject:  Re: issue 78


Am I missing something obvious, or does the spec allow you to have two RPC
requests within a single SOAP message? (I am also wondering why the usual
QName+actor dispatching mechanism does not work here.)

BTW, in your example, why couldn't "id1" be a header?

Frank DeRose wrote:

> <SOAP-ENV:Body
> SOAP-ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"/>
>   <SOAP-ENC:int id="i1" SOAP-ENC:root='0'>34.5</SOAP-ENC:int>
>   <m:GetLastTradePriceResponse xmlns:m="Some-URI">
>     <PriceAndVolume>
>       <LastTradePrice href="#i1"/>
>       <DayVolume>10000</DayVolume>
>     </PriceAndVolume>
>   </m:GetLastTradePriceResponse>
> </SOAP-ENV:Body>

Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 06:55:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:36 UTC