Re: [Soaplab2-dev] Which style of WSDL

[Peter E. <P....@dk...>]

Hello Mahmut,

thank you for the link.


On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Mahmut Uludag wrote:

> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-whichwsdl/
> 
> The main advantage of the rpc/encoded style is that the WSDL is as
> straightforward as it's possible for a WSDL to be. 

:-)) Well, not really a strong point.

The referenced web page claims this "strength" also for rpc/literal: "The
WSDL is still about as straightforward as it is possible for WSDL to be."


And below, they weaken these strenghts by saying about document/literal:
"The WSDL is getting a bit more complicated. This is a very minor
weakness, however, since WSDL is not meant to be read by humans."


I can accept the phrase "getting a bit more complicated", when talking 
about "read by humans". However, I don't think that document style is more 
difficult to create by machines (here: Soaplab) and more difficult to read 
by machines (here: Soaplab clients).



> > Does rpc/rpc provide features, missing in document/literal but
> > necessary or good to have in Soaplab?
> 
> Using rpc/encoded style it is possible to reference the same object in
> more than one place by using the href and the id attributes, so avoiding
> duplication of data in some cases.


This is indeed the best point for rpc-style.


Kind regards,

	Peter