| Author |
Message
|
| jhalstead |
 Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 11:19 am Post subject: CCSID , HTTPRequest , UNICODE |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 16 Aug 2001
Posts: 258
Location: London
|
Hi,
We are calling a webservice using the HTTP Request Node. The content of the message received includes the UTF-8 'E acute' character [c3 89]. However as soon as this is interpretted by the broker (i.e. we view the message body after the HTTP Request node in debug) it is represented as two characters ....
So - whereas this is what should be shown:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<BodyDesc>4-DR COUPÉ</BodyDesc>
What is actually disgourged is:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<BodyDesc>4-DR COUPÃÂ</BodyDesc>
I am aware that in the MQMD & MQInput nodes we'd want to specify the relevant CCSIDs (e.g. 1208) however I don't see how I can do this for the HTTP Request node.
Any ideas or thoughts would be much appreciated!
Thanks
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I think you need to set the content type of the HTTP Request to indicate that it has UTF-8 text in it.
This should be in the HTTP header.
But I'm mostly guessing here.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jhalstead |
| Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 16 Aug 2001
Posts: 258
Location: London
|
Thanks Jeff.
If I look at the HTTP Header in the Response being despatched to us in a packet sniffer I see...
"Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8"
So I'm guessing that this isn't the problem.
Any other thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mgk |
| Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1642
|
Hi,
Which CSD of V5 are you using. There is a fix for a problem similar to this in one of the recent CSDs (I think 4, but can't remember exactly).
Cheers,
_________________
MGK
The postings I make on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jhalstead |
| Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 16 Aug 2001
Posts: 258
Location: London
|
Hi mgk,
This cerrtainly sounds interesting! We're currently on CSD03. I did have a peep through memo.ptf for CSD05, didn't see anything that looked relevant - however I guess the abstract titles are never the most representative thing to go off! Any insight you could offer on this would be much appreciated.
Thanks
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mgk |
| Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1642
|
The fix I am thinking of (similar to your problem) was made under APAR
PQ85457 and was introduced in CSD4. I cannot guarantee it will solve your problem but I think it may help.
Regards,
MGK
_________________
MGK
The postings I make on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jhalstead |
| Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 16 Aug 2001
Posts: 258
Location: London
|
Yeah - that looks like a good one! Will try and arrange an upgrade. Many thanks.
Jamie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
