Re: Using unbounded sequences

From: Dennis Sosnoski <>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:49:00 -0800

Don't they have separate sample applications for doc/lit and rpc/lit?
I'd assume they would, but haven't looked into this myself.

For that matter, I don't know why the WS-I decided to stay with two
options (doc/lit and rpc/lit) as opposed to just one. I haven't seen any
place where they actually mandate support for either, only that they
forbid other alternatives (rpc/enc in particular). It seems like this
just offers the opportunity for more interoperability confusion - which
was what WS-I was supposed to solve.

  - Dennis

Doug Kohlert wrote:

>I guess I assumed WS-I BP requires rpc/literal since the sample
>application uses it quite a bit. Seems if support isn't required, the
>sample app would not test for it.
>Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>I don't know of any place where WS-I BP requires support for
>>rpc/literal, only that it allows it. It seems clear that this form is
>>likely to die out quickly, since it has major disadvantages as opposed
>>to doc/literal (particularly that it can't be validated) and no
>>substantial advantages.
>> - Dennis

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail: