----- Original Message ----- From: "David Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "C Santosh Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 10:25 AM Subject: Re: Doubt on Web Services -SOAP
> > > Maybe I don't understand, but why can't he just use a standard SOAP RPC > > > request and return a String that contains the XML response? > > > > > > > > > With proper encoding, I guess this can be done. But it is not recomended. > > document style is for those systems which take XML and give out XML. > > and rpc style is for those which take data in the form of some "simple" > > parameters > > and give out similar output(a typical procedure does this). > > > > So depending on how you modelled your service, you can choose one of the > > above. > > Well, I don't use simple parameters at all, but I'm using the BeanSerializer > for my complex objects, many of which contain arrays of other complex > objects. Most of my methods are standard RPC (heck, I'm not even sure > how/why I'd change the style and what it would mean for my code). But one > returns a String that is an XML document. It's not that this is trying to > get around anything, but our software produces some responses in XML for > offline storage, and when that is called via SOAP, it also returns the data > in XML. It seems to work without any problem, so I hope there's nothing > "wrong" with this approach. From what I gather, all String parameters > should be properly encoded by the SOAP layer automatically. > > David > > yes, you are not wrong. it is a matter of choice. If you already have your setup up and running, then it is okay. But if you have to start from ground up, then you might want to consider the document style also. Ofcourse, in the document style, there is this problem of client knowing the structure of your xml and it is a different issue altogether. Santosh PS: sending this to mailing list for benifit of other readers. and comments ofcourse:-)
