Dave- Saturday, October 6, 2007, 2:02:37 AM, you wrote:
> You might want to point out your revisions to RunRev. I think there > is a case for consigning the "unsupported" stack to the bonfire. :-) I'm not quite sure it's up to snuff the way it is. I wrote it by modifying your original when it didn't work for me and I needed to work with our existing web services. I wasn't at all sure it would work over an https connection, but the authentication process went smoothly. > My inability to "get" SOAP, is that I still don't see how it offers > great advantages over exchanging XML data with conventional http > POST. (But I know I'm guilty of not trying hard enough to understand.) I think I agree with you there. SOAP, of course, allows you to provide callable functions over a single port, with parameters passed as xml data, but there are other ways of accomplishing the same goals without having to go the SOAP route. In my case, as I said, I needed to work with our existing web services, so a SOAP library fit the bill nicely. My real problem with web services, though, is that they seem to disappear after about six months or so. If you control both ends of things (you're publishing the web services as well as consuming them) then everything's ok. If you're relying on someone else's web services then they might suddenly not be there some day. It would appear that other folks try out web services and then either can't figure them out or discover that it doesn't help them make money and they go off and try something else. -- -Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution