Christian, We can put a "Content-Type" header there if needed. It really should go there, especially for byte[] messages. It's kind of important as we'd need to know if the byte[] is a MTOM byte[] or not and things like that.
(note: Freeman and I were just talking a little about this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] related to a commit he just made to the JMS conduit) Dan On Wednesday 20 August 2008 11:46:15 am Christian Schneider wrote: > How should the encoding issue be handled for JMS? As far as I know there > is no content type header in JMS. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-1668 > > Best regards > > Christian > > Daniel Kulp schrieb: > > Chris, > > > > On Wednesday 20 August 2008 4:50:52 am Wolf, Chris (IT) wrote: > >> From looking at the SOAP spec, it seems that it's the responsibilty > >> of the transport to indicate the encoding, as these samples show: > >> > >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383490 > >> > >> Note the "Content-Type:" HTTP header. > >> > >> Also note that the SOAP spec explicitly states that SOAP messages MUST > >> NOT > >> (their emphasis) contain processing instructions (e.g. the "<?xml...?>" > >> declaration) > >> > >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383492 > >> > >> > >> I wonder if we change our client to set the outboud content-type header > >> to > >> indicate the encoding, if this will fix it. I will look into this > >> angle. > > > > Yes, that is the proper fix. The charset in the Content-Type header is > > what is used to create the parser. Thus, you need to make sure the > > client sets the proper charset there. > > > > Dan -- Daniel Kulp [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
