- From: Simon Fell <soap@zaks.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 18:56:48 -0800
- To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002 21:37:35 -0500 (EST), in soap you wrote: > >Thanks Simon, > >One more observation: > >jSOAP returns a "SOAP-ENC:base64Binary". I thought that only two forms are >legal (wrt. xsd and SOAP-ENC): "xsd:base64Binary" and "SOAP-ENC:base64". > >Is this third form legal? I checked the SOAP schemas a while ago for our >gSOAP implementation and I could only find "SOAP-ENC:base64" but not >"SOAP-ENC:base64Binary" > >- Robert it depends :) I believe that for the original SOAP 1.1 schemas, that was true, the only options were SOAP-ENC:base64 and xsd:base64Binary. However the SOAP 1.1 schema's have been updated, based on a draft of the 1.2 schemas, it does in fact appear that we now have a SOAP-ENC:base64Binary type as well. I have some serious concerns about having the schemas change, but the spec not rev'd, given the number of semantic changes in the schemas. Cheers Simon www.pocketsoap.com
Received on Friday, 8 February 2002 21:57:21 UTC