[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       xmlrpc-user
Subject:    Re: thingmachines vs apache [was: Transport error]
From:       "John Wilson" <tug () wilson ! co ! uk>
Date:       2002-03-14 21:13:21
[Download RAW message or body]


----- Original Message -----
From: "Lucas Gonze" <lgonze@gonze.com>
To: <rpc-user@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: thingmachines vs apache [was: Transport error]


> > Ummmm, you must have totally ignored what John said below.  Let me
> > quote it for you:
> >
> > "Dave Winner says that XML-RPC suports all of XML."
> >
> > That means that XML decl encoding attribute is fully supported, and
> > any implementation which does not support that is BROKEN.
> >
> > Thanks, Dan
>
> Thanks, Dan, but the spec+consensus is the canonical source, not Dave.
> Even if that weren't true the statement is just handwaving.  XML-RPC
> doesn't support XML, XML supports XML-RPC.

Just to make it a little less handwaving ;-)

Message from Dave Winer to the XML-RPC mailing list 22/4/2001

"Dan, XML-RPC is XML.

It says it very very clearly in the spec. [1] "An XML-RPC message is an
HTTP-POST request. The body of the request is in XML. A procedure executes
on the server and the value it returns is also formatted in XML."

It doesn't say "something like XML" or "a vague subset of XML."

In fact, the clarity and conciseness of XML 1.0 has a lot to do with the
success of XML-RPC.

It's one of the reasons the XML-RPC spec is so short.

It's just XML."


Dave is the author of the spec, the owner of the copyright of the spec and
the owner of the XML-RPC trademark.

You say "(given that I'm basing this reading
on offhand informal comments from a couple people) consensus is that the
spec is the spec and therefore the encoding attribute should be left off."

I think that the informal offhand comments of a couple of people is a rather
weak foundation for a rather strong statement. Don't you?




[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]