Re: Re: Transactional Integrity of Services (LONG)
mc@x... (Mike Champion) writes: >This is fine in a pure, designed for all-one-protocol environment, but >creates all sorts of problems when bridging conceptually different >protocols. Putting information in the fuzzy intermediate XML zone >(such as SOAP headers) allows those ubiquitous XML processors to look >deep inside the message (with XPath, SAX, DOM, regexp, whatever) to >make routing/filtering decisions that would be impractical before XML >came along. So I guess it's fair to say that XML's insistence on a singly-rooted tree has led to some very strange architectural decisions by people who want to slap protocols into single XML documents. I really don't like it when my letters arrive glued to the envelope - never even liked those airmail things. BEEP did a much nicer job with this stuff, using XML for both headers and (sometimes) content, but keeping them in separate documents. They demonstrated that XML can useful for protocols work but that you don't need to confuse XML documents with messages. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
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