In our works ( VA).. we had the "Document-Literal" SOAP wrapper approach
and generally works easy and fine.

I would say it is order more easier than what I see Norbert mention, unless
I miss something in deference to his better experience in Pharo.

With XMLRPC in Pharo I could do a lot  Java - Smalltalk experimentally...
and I believe it should not be very tough to cobble up the simplest
workable SOAP interface bi-directional with Document/Literal approach

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-whichwsdl/

The namespace complication, which we have avoided/ I would avoid till the
reasons are high enough to justify.

********************

Not tested.. but did see this... at some time.. all squeak based..

http://www.mars.dti.ne.jp/~umejava/smalltalk/soapOpera/soapCore.html

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1399.diff?id=29

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1228.diff?id=33

http://www.mars.dti.ne.jp/~umejava/smalltalk/soapOpera/index.html



On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Johan Brichau <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for all the feedback!
>
> The SoapOpera library is using XMLSupport and I think it is a basic
> generate/parse library for SOAP messages.
> Given the time constraints and the limited number of soap calls we need to
> implement, I think we will roughly go for Norbert's approach (using
> XMLSupport) and see if we can/need to work on the SoapOpera library in the
> future. Or maybe we make a 'lightweight soap' library... I don't know.
>
> Johan
>
>
> On 03 Jun 2013, at 19:31, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 03 Jun 2013, at 18:08, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> In order to use SOAP properly you need a full namespace aware xml
> parser, a xml schema parser, a WSDL parser plus code generator and the will
> to abuse HTTP completely .
> >> Even if you build a perfect tool you'll maybe face the not so perfect
> responses from the remote side.
> >
> > Even using the Java stack with all its tools and frameworks, SOAP is
> still terrible. Especially if you have to interface with Microsofts' idea
> of SOAP and web services.
> >
> > But Johan implied already that it would not be fun.
> >
> > On the other hand, I think that XML Support _is_ namespace aware. So it
> would not be too hard to actually generate/parse SOAP messages for real.
> You could get already pretty far with that, IMHO.
> >
> > Sven
> >
> > PS: In another life I did http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-soap/ - it
> was never perfect but it kind of worked to talk to Google AdWords.
> >
> > --
> > Sven Van Caekenberghe
> > http://stfx.eu
> > Smalltalk is the Red Pill
> >
> >
>
>
>

Reply via email to