Thats an interesting comparison you bring up. Which leads to
my next question
Why would someone use the doc/literal style with JAX-RPC instead of
JAXM ?
Doesnt the doc/literal seem redundant in JAX-RPC and doesnt JAXM do
the same thing ?
/s
Ted Neward wrote:
>
> It's really more of a "Zen" thing--rpc/encoded is the act of replicating a
> call stack, whereas doc/literal is the act of passing messages, much in the
> same differentiation between RMI and JMS. In many ways, one can look at RMI
> and simply say, "Oh, that's easy, that's just passing an 'input' message to
> an endpoint, and receiving an 'output' message back." This in turn begs the
> question, what's the choice between RMI and JMS? Or, in short, what's the
> choice about between any messaging-based application, and an RPC-based one?
>
> A messaging-based app usually offers more in the way of flexibility--for
> example, a messaging-based app can do all sorts of "oneway" actions without
> requiring a response, and can offer store-and-forward kinds of functionality
> as a result. (Think of the difference between email--messaging--and a phone
> call--RPC. One requires only some supporting plumbing to make sure the
> message gets there; the other requires the same plumbing, but also that the
> recipient be there, ready to answer the incoming request and send back a
> response.) The commensurate cost that goes with a messaging application is
> the overhead of tying "request" and "response" together--identifying that
> *this* response goes with *that* request five minutes ago, and so on. (JMS
> has some headers they reserve for precisely this purpose.)
>
> Ted Neward
> {.NET || Java} Course Author & Instructor, DevelopMentor
> (http://www.develop.com)
> http://www.javageeks.com/tneward
> http://www.clrgeeks.com/tneward
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "axis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 5:16 PM
> Subject: rpc-literal and document-literal
>
> > I was trying to think of the use cases where one would prefer
> > to use document-literal over rpc encoded and drew a blank.
> >
> > Can anyone highlight why an application would choose
> > document-literal or rpc-literal as the message format ?
> >
> > What would such a use case look like ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > /s
> >
> >
