Re: WSDL binding for DIME

1) This is to support implementations that use streaming APIs like SAX
and XmlReader. Such implementations could read the SOAP envelope into a
buffer and run their parser over it. As they parse they could figure out
what to do with each attachment and read it from the network stream. The
order must match. Is relaxing this requirement a huge simplification for
other scenarios?

2) This is a spec. bug. I'll get it fixed.

Thanks,

  =3D=3D Mike =3D=3D

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Cunnings [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:13 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DIME] WSDL binding for DIME
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> Ok, this comes just in time!. Two questions:
>=20
> -- For both the open and closed content layouts, the ordering of the
> secondary payloads is constrained:
>=20
> "Secondary message parts MUST appear in the DIME message in the same
order
> as the references to those parts appear in the SOAP message."
>=20
> Is this actually necessary? It may optimize some apps, but as long as
all
> payloads are uniquely id'd why not allow any order, at least for the
> "open" layout?
>=20
> -- Shouldn't the RPC example include an <output> message definition,
> assuming it's a request/response MEP?
>=20
> RC
>=20
> I'm surprised this didn't get announced here, but here's the doc.
>=20
> http://gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/WSDL-Extension-for-DIME.htm
>=20
> BTW, you may want to fix the links in the ToC.
>=20
> Cheers
> Simon
> www.pocketsoap.com