Re: [Fedora-suds-list] Complex Return Types (Again?)

[Jeff Ortel]

On 11/19/2009 06:54 AM, Dan Sommers wrote:
>  On 2009-11-18 at 17:29:00 -0600,
>  Jeff Ortel<jortel(a)redhat.com>  wrote:
>
> > On 11/18/2009 02:44 PM, Dan Sommers wrote:
>
> > d = client.last_received()
> > s = str(d)
>
>  That was my first try, and it worked smashingly until one of my users
>  found some XML that contained an ampersand ("&") and a less than symbol
>  ("<") within its text nodes.  Somewhere in there, suds decoded the
>  entities twice, and str returned ill-formed XML (i.e., XML containing
>  actual ampersands and less than symbols in its text nodes instead of
>  "&amp;"s and "&lt;"s). 
Ah, very interesting.  Let's fix this!  Can you send me sample XML that the suds sax 
package does not handle correctly?  Also, what version of suds are you using?

> > client.set_options(retxml=True)
> > d = client.service.foo()
> > s = str(d)
>
>  That's what my code looks like now, but without that last string
>  conversion (which apparently triggers that extra level of decoding?):
>
>       client.set_options( retxml = True )
>       s = client.service.foo( ... )
>       x = lxml.etree.XML( s )
>       ...
>
> > ... Also, won't you have the same problems with:
> > <snip>
> >> I'm having an awful time fixing up all of the namespaces and getting
> >> rid of the elements with xsi:nil="true" attributes.
> > </snip>
> > even if you had the raw string XML?
>
>  My tactical mistake was prematurely extracting an XML fragment from the
>  response and losing an essential xmlns attribute or three.  Oops.  ;-)
>
>  So now I take the *whole* response (i.e., the soapenv:Envelope element)
>  and run it through an XSL transform that pulls out the fragment I need,
>  re-wraps that fragment in a new element, and removes elements with
>  xsi:nil="true" attributes.  The namespace issue went away once I fixed
>  my approach.
>
> > The exact XML (stream) returned by the server is consumed by the sax
> > parser (inline) and isn't really available.  To capture it, I would
> > have to read the entire document into memory then sax parse the
> > string.
>
>  What you're doing is definitely the right approach (not that you need my
>  approval!).  My use of the word "original" referred to the character
>  entity issue I described above.
>
>  Thank you, for both suds and your reply.
>
>  Dan