[Foundation] Jabber-RPC payload council question
DJ Adams
dj.adams at pobox.com
Mon Sep 24 06:33:06 CDT 2001
Hi
jer asked a good question on the JEP voting for Jabber-RPC
this month. As I only have read-only access to the list ;-)
I was wondering how to answer - but David Waite did the
honours:
http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/council/2001-September/000129.html
Thanks David.
For those interested / curious, the original question was
valid, as we could have had something like this:
<iq type='set' to='responder at company-a.com/jrpc-server' id='1'>
<methodCall xmlns='jabber:iq:rpc'>
<methodName>examples.getStateName</methodName>
<params>
<param>
<value><i4>6</i4></value>
</param>
</params>
</methodCall>
</iq>
which is perfectly valid but blurs the boundary between Jabber and
XML-RPC, which philosophically is OK but in practice means that an
extra step is involved in generating a clean XML-RPC encoding
(i.e. removing the xmlns attribute from the methodCall tag). Doing
it this way:
<iq type='set' to='responder at company-a.com/jrpc-server' id='1'>
<query xmlns='jabber:iq:rpc'>
<methodCall>
<methodName>examples.getStateName</methodName>
<params>
<param>
<value><i4>6</i4></value>
</param>
</params>
</methodCall>
</query>
</iq>
means that the XML-RPC encoding is carried 'untainted' as a payload.
dj
More information about the Members
mailing list