different tools support different parts of the XSD spec, so you generate your WSDL with tool A, but tool B can't process it. Typical sticking points include choice, derivation by restriction, model groups. In addition many tools still generate invalid schemas, lack of required import statements when multiple schemas are involved is a common problem. This becomes particular problematic if you start with an existing human authored schema, rather than a tool generated schema, as its more likely to use the XSD concepts designed to make authoring easier (like model groups)
Even basics like namespaces handling can be an issue, ASP.NET for example has a well known bug where it applies the wrong default to the elementFormDefault attribute, causing it to generate incorrect messages. Having said all that, soap long term future is with doc/literal messages, just don't let its proponents pull the wool over your eyes, interop is still a an issue. Cheers Simon On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:27:21 -0700 (PDT), in soap you wrote: >Simon, > >What kind of practical problems with doc/lit are there ? I would like to know.. > >thanks > >Simon Fell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 23:17:24 -0400, in soap you wrote: > >>Doc/lit doesn't define type mappings, but it definitively specifies the >>structure of the message via XML Schema. Because the two applications know >>in advance exactly what the message structure is, the details of how the >>SOAP message processor maps the XML Schema to language types doesn't matter >>to the other application. When using rpc/encoded, the two applications have >>not agreed to a specific message structure. The SOAP message processor >>generates the SOAP message structure based on it's specific interpretation >>of SOAP Section 5, and there's no definitive schema of the message. The >>interoperability issues arise when two different SOAP message procesors >>interpret SOAP Section 5 slightly differently. >> >>Anne > >In my experience I haven't found 2 toolkit that support the same >subset of XSD yet (cause no one supports the whole of XSD), so doc/lit >whilst in theory is more interoperable, in practice isn't. section 5 >has its issues, but i think the doc/lit camp are making mountains out >of molehills about them, whilst not mentioning the practical problems >that doc/lit currently has. > >Cheers >Simon >www.pocketsoap.com > >--------------------------------- >Do you Yahoo!? >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
