On Jan 20, 2004, at 13:08, Mario Salzer wrote:
http://erfurtwiki.sourceforge.net/draft-xmlplusrpc-pre00.txt
I like this, and I hope it gets some support. XML-RPC seems to be *almost* there, but dead for new changes.
Possible problems I see in the current draft: * forbids XML entities, but "<" and ">" and "&" * forbids empty tags like <string/>
I'm not sure I understand the point of these two things. It may be difficult to comply with this because standard XML generating toolkits out there might not be able to avoid them.
From doing a couple of implementations of XML-RPC in a couple different languages, I would like to think you for requiring <string> tags around strings. That's always been a particularly annoying one to parse for me.
The struct definition seems a little odd. Do you not put tags around the value (it's a little unclear)? It seems like requiring the name to come before the value, but not having any requirement for the value might make parsing a little harder (having many things to look for rather than just one). I can't decide whether I like the naming conventions on the name of the struct member. I'll go with a yes for now. :)
I think it might be good to separate the messaging from the transport. One of the things that annoyed me was that XML-RPC required HTTP by specification when the specification didn't really use HTTP for anything in particular. Of the 635 XML-RPC methods I processed in the last minute, none of them were over HTTP.
Oh, glancing through, I noticed you spelled ``Messages'' as ``Massages.'' at one point. Was that intentional? :)
-- Dustin Sallings
