Jeff, I'm not well-versed on the intentions of xsi other than indicating type...I never thought about it in a class/subclass context. I stand corrected. I was thinking that there was an implied understanding of a given type due to the rules laid out in the <types> section of my WSDL doc.
Thanks for the input, it's certainly welcome, Cory -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Greif [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: WRAPPED services without wsdl Could you clarify why you don't think attributes such as xsi:type should be valid in doc/lit. Suppose your document is described by <element foo type='bar'/> <complexType name="bar" abstract="true"> ... </complexType> <complexType name="bar1" <extension base="bar"> ... </extension> </complexType> ... other types derived from bar ... Then you might have a document <foo xsi:type="bar1">...</foo> where the xsi:type told which derived type was being used. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cory Wilkerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 8:33 AM Subject: RE: WRAPPED services without wsdl I guess my question is -- is xsi still valid in a doc/lit operation? It doesn't seem like it would be.
