From: Thomas L. <ta...@ec...> - 2001-12-06 12:21:29
|
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 11:52:18AM +0000, Stephen Watson wrote: > Incidently either the filer is confused about the namespace to use in > FileTypeReply, or I am. It's returning <FileTypeReply> in the default > namespace, not the rox namespace. Either it should be <rox:FileTypeReply> or > it should make the rox namespace the default. Of course I could have just > got it wrong in my original rpc_FileType version. Hmm... the SOAP spec has changed! (well, it IS a working draft...) Old version: * Each parameter accessor has a name corresponding to the name of the parameter and type corresponding to the type of the parameter. The name of the return value accessor is not significant. Likewise, the name of the struct is not significant. However, a convention is to name it after the procedure or method name with the string "Response" appended. New version: * Each parameter accessor has a name corresponding to the name of the parameter and type corresponding to the type of the parameter. The name of the return value accessor is "result" and it is namespace-qualified with the namespace identifier "http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-rpc" The return value accessor MUST be present if the return value of the procedure is non-void. The return value accessor MUST NOT be present if the return value of the procedure is void. So, we're now required to give the return value a fixed name, but the note about the name of the struct being anything has been removed altogether with nothing in its place! Anyway, I've changed it to the obvious system now. -- Thomas Leonard http://rox.sourceforge.net ta...@ec... ta...@us... |