RE: XML vs. Name Value pair was ->RE: XML

<Brad>
Yes, classic does.  I guess I've never run across that
problem.. you must be trying to cheat or something with
your programs.  Ha..
</Brad>

Well you gonna tell me how to fix it or just leave me hanging? :-)  Do I
need to run the input through an API?  If that is the case will that API
take an IFS file as input because some of my XML documents have the
potential to go past RPG max field lengths.

Aaron Bartell 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Stone [mailto:brad@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:52 PM
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: XML vs. Name Value pair was ->RE: [WEB400] XML and RPG-CGI,
is X ML needed. was -> HolyWar . . ..


On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:44:18 -0500 
 "Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)" <ALBartell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The nice thing about Apache is that it decodes the
> content of the post back
> to normal, meaning it takes out all encodings like %20.
>  With Classic you
> have to decode it manually, unless there is a setting I
> have missed.  I like
> Classic better than Apache except for above reason.

Almost forget about this one,

Yes, classic does.  I guess I've never run across that
problem.. you must be trying to cheat or something with
your programs.  Ha..

Nope, I haven't one ONE single advantage to Apache over
classic.  Well, the information for Apache is everywhere,
but it doesn't really always apply to the iseries version
of the server either (ie configuring CGI for example...)
 Oh, and I guess IBM dropping Classic for Apache is another
advantage, however forced it is.

Brad
 

_______________________________________________
This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400) mailing list
To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.