cbbrowne@cbbrowne.com kirjutas N, 03.04.2003 kell 02:01:
> mlw wrote:
> > I think you are interpreting the spec a bit too restrictively. The
> > syntax is fairly rigid, but the spec has a great degree of flexibility.
> > I agree that, syntactically, it must work through a parser, but there is
> > lots of room to be flexible.
>
> This is /exactly/ the standard problem with SOAP.
>
> There is enough "flexibility" that there are differing approaches
> associated, generally speaking, with "IBM versus Microsoft" whereby it's
> easy to generate SOAP requests that work fine with one that break with
> the other.
Do you know of some:
a) standard conformance tests
b) recommended best practices for being compatible with all mainstream
implementations (I'd guess a good approach would be to generate very
strictly conformant code but accept all that you can, even if against
pedantic reading of the spec)
-----------------
Hannu
