The difference boils down to how the two engines serialize tables to XML.
In 2000, the serialization is done post-query so the output of a FOR XML
query is never available to a subsequent step. In 2005 the engine, regardless
of compatibility mode, serializes in-query.
Re: Serialization Question ... Note that this option can get tricky, as you are going to return an XML string from the web service method, which may not work for them. ... Create another object that has the clients format and transfer the information from your object to that object when the web routine that this client uses is hit. ... The only reason I can see is you are trying to serialize this information and present it, via some sort of service boundary, as XML, not as a serialized object. ... I would take the XML through a transformation to get the format you desire rather than attempt to have the object serialize differently. ... (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
Re: Serialization Question ... files to a partner organisation and they are expecting an XML file of the ... The only reason I can see is you are trying to serialize this information ... If I had Address as Array(of String) then all parts of address would have ... How could I change things so the the XML file produced is of this format: ... (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
Re: DataSet and best practice in 2.0 ... from webservices to remoting no? ... which changes the whole game for distributed apps....Collections serialize to XML as well so there's not that much ... (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.performance)
Re: DataSet and best practice in 2.0 ... dataset to a byte, which has about 35,000 elements in the array.... The suggestion was to use Base64 encoding, not xml, to serialize the ... as far as switching to binary serialization,... (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.performance)
