Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Who's afraid of XML-RPC?
ruud wrote:
… that makes the xml-rpc interface respond with a HTTP 503 error at a very early stage during execution.
This requires an in-depth consideration: On layer 4, IXR_IntrospectionServer generally replies with HTTP status ‘200’. Error conditions are signalled to the client on layer 7 as a XML response packet.
I think we should not deviate too much from the expected behaviour and just disable the accepted method signatures, but not the service itself. This gives more clue to clients to present users with a friendly error message. Specifying a correct XML endpoint is a challenge for end-users in itself, so any high-level clues we provide will reduce support load for both us and the desktop client vendors.
I am very hesitant to cripple the interface too much, as verbosity in error reporting is a benefit from my POV with all the different third-party clients involved (given that if we do not expect to fail substantially with the package as a whole).
Offline