Originally posted by Vasim Patel:
Are there any specific rules for rpc which differentiate from document.
RMH : 18.104.22.168 The message Element for Document-Style Web Services
message part may declare either a type attribute or an element attribute, but not both. Which to use depends on the kind of messaging you're doing. If you're using RPC-style messaging, the part elements must use the type attribute; if you're using document-style messaging, the part elements must use the element attribute.BP
As a countermeasure the document/literal wrapped pattern is suggested and outlined.
The WSDL is getting a bit more complicated. This is a very minor weakness, however, since WSDL is not meant to be read by humans. The operation name in the SOAP message is lost. Without the name, dispatching can be difficult, and sometimes impossible. WS-I only allows one child of the soap:body in a SOAP message.
Originally posted by Haitham Ismail:
so you mean the first scenario is allowed by the WS-I but we should not use it. right?
WSDL 1.1 is not completely clear what, in document-literal style bindings, the child element of soap:Body is.
R2712 A document-literal binding MUST be represented on the wire as a MESSAGE with a soap:Body whose child element is an instance of the global element declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:message part.