On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 16:37:56 -0500 , in soap you wrote:
>>Are you aware of any other vendors that use the "wrapped" style? Don't you
>>think that using a part name (and the fact that there is only one) as a
>>means of discriminating between "document" and "wrapped" is fairly delicate?
>>I appreci
riginal Message-
From: Simon Fell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 9:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wrapped vs. Document
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:55:45 +0100, in soap you wrote:
>Are you aware of any other vendors that use the "wrapped" s
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:55:45 +0100, in soap you wrote:
>Are you aware of any other vendors that use the "wrapped" style? Don't you
>think that using a part name (and the fact that there is only one) as a
>means of discriminating between "document" and "wrapped" is fairly delicate?
>I appreciate t
Sorry not an answer but more related questions.
I thought the idea of RPC style was to wrap all the requests within
operation elements. Why can't Axis just recognize RPC/literal to do the
same thing instead of relying on proprietary pattern matching of the input
message (to match 'parameters')
Tom,
Thanks for the comprehensive reply. The RPC binding for "wrapped" style
services provided by Axis is excellent, but as expected, I have more
questions and comments! ;-)
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> The "wrapped" style indicates a particular style of doing document/literal
that emulates RPC. This sound
Hi Tim,
The "wrapped" style indicates a particular style of doing document/literal that
emulates RPC. This sounds a bit strange, but the best example of this is Microsoft
.NET web services. For document style, each message part is an element in the
request. For a wrapped style service, the
