WS-I Basic Profile, the reference for SOAP interoperability, says it prefers "literal" rather than "encoded" : Extract : "As a result, the Profile prefers the use of literal, non-encoded XML." Chapter : "4.1.7 SOAP encodingStyle Attribute" URL : http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.0-2004-04-16.html#refinement16448072
Unfortunately, I did not find in this spec any clear statement saying that "document" (in a wrapped style) is preferred to "rpc". However, you will find many articles that say "document" is preferred to "rpc". Cyrille -- Cyrille Le Clerc [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.0-2004-04-16.html On 2/2/06, Jyotishman Pathak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dov, > > I found this article [1] from IBM to be quite useful. At the same time, I am > interested in knowing more about your investigation. > > Thanks, > - Jyoti > > [1] > http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-whichwsdl/?ca=dgr-devx-WebServicesMVP03 > > > > > > On 2/2/06, Balaji D L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can you share your analyse with us ?? > > It will be very useful. > > Regards > > Balaji > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Dov Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: 02 February 2006 14:21:37 > > Subject: Document Literal vs Document Wrapped vs RPC Encoding > > > > I have done a bunch of investigating to determine the > > differences/benefits/limitations of the 3 styles of WSDL generation. In > > general it seems that the preferred version is Document Literal. Are there > > any other opinions as to the most popular version? > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > -- > > Dov Rosenberg > > Inquira Inc > > 370 Centerpointe Circle, ste 1178 > > Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 > > (407) 339-1177 x 102 > > (407) 339-6704 (fax) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > AOL IM: dovrosenberg > > > > > > > > -- > Jyotishman Pathak > WWW: http://www.cs.iastate.edu/~jpathak
