[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wss] Proposed text on C14N
xsi:type is used frequently in doc/literal: you must write it out any time you use a subtype in place of the type identified by the schema. further, its not uncommon for impls to write out xsi:type for all elements, as an added measure of safety. the reason the c14n question came up in the interop (as I recall) was that some impls were writing out xsi:type, and all we were doing was Ping -- if that's any indication. -Pete On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 15:27, Rich Salz wrote: > Is xsi:type used in doc/literal very much? > It's practically required in RPC encoded SOAP, but since WS-I killed > that, I'm curious how common xsi:type will be. > /r$ > > -- > Rich Salz Chief Security Architect > DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com > XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html > XML Security Overview http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html -- Peter Dapkus <pdapkus@bea.com>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]