Re: heritage (was Re: SGML on the Web)
> I'm sure that practical experience quickly showed the > SOAP people that anything that gets defined in a DTD is an interoperability > sink once a message leaves its source. There are a couple of reasons why SOAP doesn't allow DTD's. First, a majority of the original authors are strong believers in XML Schema. Second, there are real security issues with external entities -- I could send a SOAP message to a server and have it access something I couldn't, or it shouldn't. > Also, there *is* a fair amount of whimpering because SOAP isn't a good > transport for arbitrary XML. I think most SOAP folks believe this to be an XML issue: you can't embed an arbitrary XML document inside an XML document. There are issues like encoding, the embedded doc can't have its own DTD, potential ID attribute conflicts (but see previous item), etc. SOAP actually has an answer to this -- message attachments. > every so often (although PIs are the only thing that anyone can make a > credible case for putting back Yeah, even though SOAP 1.2 is at last call, just a couple of weeks ago there was a flurry of messages about removing the prohibition on PI's. /r$
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format