Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> 
> This looks to me to be an error in Axis2. The schema spec says the 
> xsi:nil attribute is of type boolean, and boolean allows "0" as 
> equivalent to "false" and "1" as equivalent to "true". 
> 

This morning I had the time to dig into w3c raccomandations. It tooks a
while and I think you are right, both representations are correct:
true/false 1/0

At first reading from http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#xsi_nil it seems
that the correct value is "true": 

"...An element may be ·valid· without content if it has the attribute
xsi:nil with the value true..."

But reading the datatypes spec for boolean
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#boolean) I found:


> "...3.2.2.1 Lexical representation
> 
> An instance of a datatype that is defined as ·boolean· can have the
> following legal literals {true, false, 1, 0}.
> 3.2.2.2 Canonical representation
> 
> The canonical representation for boolean is the set of literals {true,
> false}..."
> 

I think that the misunderstanding started from this example taken from XML
Schema Part 0: Primer Second Edition
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/#Nils): 


> Example
> 
> <xsd:element name="shipDate" type="xsd:date" nillable="true"/>
> 
> <shipDate xsi:nil="true"></shipDate>
> 

So I'll create a Jira.


Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> 
> Yet another of 
> those nice little quirks that makes schema so much fun for both users 
> and implementors.
> 

Actually, day by day, WS-* are becoming more frustrating than funny for me
;-)

<ranting>
Too many interoperability issues in real world... everything works smootly
only if both end points uses the same product or I'm really really lucky.
- If I'm implementing both server and client I don't see the advantage of
using a so complicated technology.
- If I'm implementing just one side, the automagically generated wsdl or
automagically generated client stubs from wsdl it's really a dicer's oath
:-) 99% of the time you finish digging into wsdl editing or on the wire
analisys...

I was caught in between :-) I'm implementing both sides and I have two
products: Axis on the server side and JBossWS on client side. I wouldn't
wish it upon my worst enemy: time spent on this technology is becoming
nearly the same time spent implementing the real business logic.
I think that sometime we lose sight of our real targets. I think that WS-*
are what I call a "tool" technology, They are a help for our applications.
Using a screwdriver shouldn't be harder than building a car. 
How many times, deployng and managing an applications into an application
server is far more complicated than application itself? If it's happen,
probably we missed something.
</ranting>

Bye

--
Davide
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/xsi%3Anil%3D%271%27-Null-what-is-wrong-with-this-soap-body--tf3040150.html#a8466219
Sent from the Axis - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to