As John says XML-RPC actually predates SOAP. It's also simpler and thus
easier to implement but SOAP has better support for handling complex types.
Ultimately you have to choose the one that best meets your application
requirements. I do feel strongly that HTTP is the wrong transport protocol
for an RPC mechanism; BEEP is a much better choice.
... WkH
p.s. RFC 3288 describes how to use SOAP over BEEP
Timur Shemsedinov
<Timur(_at_)niist(_dot_)ntu-k To: Ward
Harold/Austin/IBM(_at_)IBMUS
pi.kiev.ua> cc:
ietf(_at_)IETF(_dot_)ORG, jstracke(_at_)centivinc(_dot_)com
Subject: Re[2]: Last Call:
Using XML-RPC in BEEP to Proposed Standard
10/11/2002 03:38
AM
Please respond to
Timur Shemsedinov
Ward,
thanks for explanations and references. I have one more question.
XMLRPC is similar to SOAP in abilities and applications,
as I understand. But on my personal opinion, if to compare,
XMLRPC has much more winning data representation. "Envelope" is
terrible itself. Here question, whether is necessary to have two
realizations of the RPC using XML? I think that it is not profits
integration and compatibility. It seems to me that it is necessary
to seek cooperation between developers for establishing of the
trade-off decision.
--
Best regards,
Timur
mailto:Timur(_at_)niist(_dot_)ntu-kpi(_dot_)kiev(_dot_)ua