Re: Proposal for cleanup of RPC section (issue 195)

Jacek Kopecky writes:

>> it will always be there, even if null (marked with xsi:null="true"

That would make sense, but now I am confused.  The text quoted below 
seemed specifically to indicate that it would not be there:

>> The return value outbound edge MUST NOT be 
>> present if the return value of the procedure is void

What am I missing?

------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------







Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
04/08/2002 05:57 PM

 
        To:     Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
        cc:     xml-dist-app@w3.org
        Subject:        Re: Proposal for cleanup of RPC section (issue 195)


 Noah,
 it is impossible to omit some members in an array. Therefore, if 
the first member is meant to be the return value (and we know 
that from the signature), it will always be there, even if null 
(marked with xsi:null="true"). If the text needs some rewording 
to show that, I won't object to it. 8-)

 Anyway, the quoted text will be gone if we accept my full
proposal.  8-)

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM wrote:

 > Jacek Kopecky writes:
 > 
 > >> * In the array representation of the response, 
 > >> the return value outbound edge is the first 
 > >> member of the array if the return value of the 
 > >> procedure is non-void. The return value outbound 
 > >> edge MUST NOT be present if the return value of 
 > >> the procedure is void, therefore the first edge 
 > >> is the first [out] or [in/out] parameter.
 > 
 > Is it intentional that when modeling a function with positional [out] 
 > arguments, we cannot reliably determine whether the return value is 
void 
 > unless we have external knowledge of the method signature and the 
number 
 > of arguments expected?  For a function taking a variable number of 
 > arguments, it would seem to be impossible to determine in general 
whether 
 > the return value was void.
 > 
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------
 > Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
 > IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
 > One Rogers Street
 > Cambridge, MA 02142
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------
 > 
 > 
 >

Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 18:20:20 UTC