I do have the 2.01 version, so I've got the latest stacks. I think a lot of the problem I am running into is that Amazon and RunRev seem to use different terminology for the same thing, and since I am just beginning to fool around with SOAP it's confusing.
As far as Amazon goes, I think I am probably just going to switch over to using their XML version of their web services, sicne they are super easy to understand,a nd do everything that the soap version does - I was able to get my catalog building software for Amazon affiliates to work within abvout two hours... Thanks! >> At 2:10 pm -0700 11/6/03, Edwin Gore wrote: >> >I'm starting to play around with Amazon's Web >Services stuff, and I >> >noticed that none of the 2.0 commands for using >Soap seem to have >> >made it into the Docs. I know about the sample >files, and it looks >> >like that has everything I am going to need to >start fooling around, >> >just wanted to make Jeanne et. al. aware that >none of it made it >> >into the docs, so it might be hard for some >people to find. >> >> I can't speak for Jeanne or Kevin, but I think it >was probably a good >> idea not to include the SOAP stuff in the docs. >When the revSOAP >> toolbox was put together (I'll take the blame), >there had been some >> requests for SOAP support but nothing specific >about what kind of >> support was wanted. At the same time, various >standards in the web >> services world were in a state of flux, and new >standards seemed to >> be coming into play every other week. So the >toolbox was basically a >> guide to how you might put together SOAP >requests. >> >> If more people need to use SOAP, then I'm hoping >more specific >> requests might come in about the form this may >take, appropriate >> syntax, etc. (Requests to RunRev, please, not >me.) If something more >> concrete were to emerge from that, then that >might be the time to >> include it in the docs. >> >> Please let us know about your experiences with >Amazon. >> >> Cheers >> Dave >> >> PS Do you have the SOAP toolbox that shipped with >the final release >> of 2.0? In some of the earlier beta releases, >there was a less >> complete "examples" stack only. >> _______________________________________________ >> use-revolution mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolu >tion _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
