New encoding issue - consistency and sanity checks

 your proposal here is reasonable but it's orthogonal to issue
#171 and its resolution. The current spec does not say a SOAP
Encoding processor should/must check for the presence of its
attributes (which would be position, offset, arrayType/
arraySize, itemType) where they do not rightfully belong and
fault. We don't even have a fault for that. 8-)
 Hugo or Yves, please open a new issue for Encoding as described
above, if Rich confirms my understanding of his issue.

 My proposal for its resolution would be to keep the status quo,
the rationale being that the other resolution adds unnecessary
burden to the receivers of SOAP Encoded data and unnecessary
complexity to the spec text.

 I will not fight fiercely (or at all) though against the other
resolution - mandating consistency checks.

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Rich Salz wrote:

 > Ignoring other attributes, in the general case, makes sense for the
 > reasons you list. But making a special rule for position and offset
 > closes the potential ambiguity in a more robust way.
 > 	/r$

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 10:53:53 UTC