Actually, Fred’s suggestion is correct. He is saying that the client needs to encode the special characters before they are coming to the IS because it will fail on receipt of “&”; or “<”. This is a common practice in the XML world and is always a topic for discussion when ramping up new customers, discussing text fields for item descriptions, etc.
To understand why this is an important point, think of the “<” rather than a “&”.; If a customer sent this character in an XML message, it will fail every time b/c wM thinks its a new XML tag. If you were to try to create a java service to receive this character properly, that would be nearly impossible to search for any instance of a incomplete tag.
When you run the docToRecord and recordToDoc services you should make sure the encoding parameter is in sync (so you know that you are sending an encoded message out).
Regarding the CDATA tag that is mentioned originally, that will also work if the client sends XML with “&”; enclosed in a CDATA tag. The IS will remove this tag on receipt automatically, and any & will not fail. Of course, this is just another flavor of encoding, so might as well have the customer send html encoded messages rather than CDATA encoded messages.
#webMethods-General#webMethods#Integration-Server-and-ESB