On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 11:44:47AM -0500, Glen Daniels wrote: > 1) Do you use P.T./sparse arrays currently? If so, what are the scenarios > (array updates, avoiding sending lots of nulls, etc...)?
I attempt to decode them, but never send them. > 2) Would it bother you to see them go away in SOAP 1.2? I would like to see them go awy in SOAP 1.2. My reasons are: * Why are p-t-a's considered more important than all the other data structures out there? SOAP does not do the others, so why do p-t-a? Keep SOAP simple. * P-t-a can be easily implemented by using a different data structure. So removing them from core SOAP *does not* mean they cannot be used in SOAP applications. * There is no differentiation at present in types of arrays, sparse arrays, and p-t-a arrays on the wire or in WSDL files. This is bad as some people say p-t-a arrays are different to arrays, others say they are the same, the SOAP spec indicates they are different - but they use identical type information! * The most basic array type I think should match well general programming language array types - and omitted array items does not fit this. * They add significant extra processing when encoding/decoding arrays (because they are not different). Try writing decoding code with then and without them. There is a big difference in length, which will impact performance of implementations. So I feel that either * Remove p-t-a and sparse from SOAP 1.2 and let a WSDL file do it (eg. come up with standard WSDL encodings for p-t-a arrays, and lots of other data structures such as Maps etc) OR * Make p-t-a/sparse a different type to simple arrays in the SOAP spec. Eg: if the current type is split into itemType and arraySize, add another one saying of sparse or not etc. Alan
