- From: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 09:04:32 -0500
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- CC: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>, XML Protocol Discussion <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> you mean turning the fault into a data. Your problem is that the > fault is not encoded in such a way that it could be marked as > following the Encoding rules and it would be a legal > serialization according to the rules, right? Right. > Faults are a part of the core SOAP, Encoding is an optional > adjunct so we should not make the faults follow the encoding > rules explicitly. If there is no compelling need to make a data structure incompatible with SOAP Encoding, then I am strongly in favor of making it possible to "naively" and "obviously" use SOAP Encoding to express that data structure as it moves from XML to a native programming language representation and back again. Making it a goal that core SOAP data structure are compatible with SOAP Encoding does not mean that Encoding now becomes part of the core. /r$ -- Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures, Encryption) http://www.zolera.com
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2001 09:02:12 UTC