RE: Issue with encodingStyle

 Matt,
 in my opinion mixing encodings can (and should) be handled by 
every encoding (and data model) that allows such mixing. 
 SOAP Data Model has nodes which are structs, arrays and 
primitive data typed by XML Schema simple types. XML Schema 
simple types don't contain a type for "an XML node", unless we 
use the "anyType" thing. 
 Therefore I suggest that the change of encodingStyle inside 
SOAP Encoding data be done as follows:

 <struct encodingStyle=".../soap/encoding">
    <member xsi:type="int">3</member>
    <other xsi:type="anyType" encodingStyle="other-encoding">
      ...
    </other>
 </struct>

 Here we have a struct with two primitive members, one of type 
int, second of type "anything", where the deserialization of that 
member follows the inner encoding style.
 Even if the xsi:type actually pointed to some concrete schema 
type (complex or simple), the changed encodingStyle IMO means 
that this node is a simple type from the POV of the SOAP Encoding 
data.
 If my view is agreed on, I think it should go in the Encoding 
spec somewhere because it affects typing in some cases.
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

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



On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Matt Long wrote:

 > I would also like to see mixed encoding addressed. Specifically, how to
 > explicitly mark an element as literal XML.
 > 
 > Thx,
 > 
 > -Matt Long
 > Phalanx Systems, LLC
 > 
 > > -----Original Message-----
 > > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
 > > [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On
 > > Behalf Of Bob Cunnings
 > > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:49 AM
 > > To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
 > > Subject: Re: Issue with encodingStyle
 > >
 > >
 > > Hello,
 > >
 > > I also shared these concerns... see
 > >
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Jan/0055.html
 > >
 > > but no response was elicited.
 > >
 > > rC
 > >
 > > > All,
 > > >
 > > > I want to raise an issue with the definition of the encodingStyle
 > > > attribute in Section 4.1 of SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [1].
 > > >
 > > > The spec says that encoded message "SHOULD" indicate their encoding
 > > > style using the encodingStyle attribute.
 > > >
 > > > It also says that if the encodingStyle attribute is set to
 > > "", no claims
 > > > are made about the encoding style of an elements contents.
 > > >
 > > > The spec does not say how to interpret the absence of an
 > > encodingStyle
 > > > attribute. However, given that encoded messages are not
 > > required to use
 > > > the encodingStyle attribute, I believe the absence of the
 > > does not mean
 > > > that the message is not encoded, but rather that it makes
 > > no claim about
 > > > its encoding (eqivalent to encodingStyle="").
 > > >
 > > > Can you please clarify the definition of the phrase "makes
 > > no claims"?
 > > > If a message does not include an encodingStyle attribute,
 > > does that mean
 > > > that:
 > > >
 > > > a) the message is NOT encoded
 > > > b) the message may or may not be encoded, it chose not to say
 > > > c) something else
 > > >
 > > > Based on the current spec, I think the answer is b. This is
 > > problematic
 > > > if a SOAP processor is trying to determine how to process a message.
 > > >
 > > > I'd like to see the spec revised so that:
 > > >
 > > > - messages whose content model is defined based on a set of encoding
 > > > rules *MUST* indicate their encoding sytle using the encodingStyle
 > > > attribute
 > > >
 > > > - elements without an explicitly stated encodingStyle have
 > > NO encoding
 > > > style, i.e., their format is explicitly defined via XSD or
 > > some other
 > > > mechanism (elements can turn off their parent's encoding style with
 > > > encodingStyle="")
 > > >
 > > > Thanks,
 > > > Tim-
 > > >
 > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-part1-20011217/#soapencattr
 > > >
 > >
 >

Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 05:35:07 UTC