DataContractSerializer: why not remove members?

Simply because outside service consumers may provide/use that data (they were created before you removed some members). In case you've changed service method signature DataContractSerializer won't be able to recognize DataContract anymore, because of unknown data members So if your service consumers are all known, you can easily manipulate data members at your own will as long as you: don't break consumers or properly inform them of the change.

Simply because outside service consumers may provide/use that data (they were created before you removed some members). In case you've changed service method signature, DataContractSerializer won't be able to recognize DataContract anymore, because of unknown data members. So if your service consumers are all known, you can easily manipulate data members at your own will as long as you: don't break consumers or properly inform them of the change.

One issue is that even if it doesn't break during serialization/deserialization, you could be throwing away data - meaning that you can't successfully round-trip data back to the caller. I.e. Given the simple method: public SomeType Echo(SomeType obj) { return obj; } If the caller is passing you the old object with the extra property, they might want that value back.

You can enable this (separately) with the extension data API, but frankly people rarely bother with this.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.