intertwingly

Sam, did you point your friend to the XML-RPC website?

Ken is correct that the response is not well-formed XML: the opening struct tag is missing.

Perhaps I'm missing something -- I am new to this XML and Weblogging stuff, after all -- but shouldn't the responses to a ping to Weblogs.Com be valid XML? Like including an opening <struct> tag? And what's with the </value> </member> </value> construct? And the unencoded '>' on the ...... [more]

Trackback from Ken's Blog from the Burrow

OK, I've debugged this. The result is well formed XML, but seems inconsistent in the placement of linefeed characters. When output to the screen, lines without linefeeds will be quickly overlayed. Only & and < characters are required to be escaped in XML.

Below is the output I get, with all the control characters exposed:

<?xml version="1.0"?>\r\n
<methodResponse>\r\n
\t<params>\r\n
\t\t<param>\r\n
\t\t\t<value><struct>\r
\t\t<member>\r
\t\t\t<name>flerror</name>\r
\t\t\t<value>\r
\t\t\t\t<boolean>0</boolean>\r
\t\t\t\t</value>\r
\t\t\t</member>\r
\t\t<member>\r
\t\t\t<name>message</name>\r
\t\t\t<value>Thanks for the ping. We checked and found that the "Sam Ruby" weblog has not changed, so it has not been added to changes.xml.</value>\r
\t\t\t</member>\r
\t\t</struct></value>\r\n
\t\t\t</param>\r\n
\t\t</params>\r\n
\t</methodResponse>\r\n

that's a relief! thanks, sam!

Sam Ruby pointed out my gaffe concerning the XML response from WebLogs.Com. Okey, I screwed up; it's good to be reminded of the basics. In other areas, my home DSL provider is due to shut down at the end of January 2003, which means I need to either transition ...... [more]

Trackback from Ken's Blog from the Burrow