How about using either an XML string or an XML Element as the input parameter.
This way the client programs do not have to worry about the custom classes. What I
did was to use an XML Element as the input parameter to the SOAP service. And on
the server, extract the values from the Element into custom classes. The client
only needs to know the structure of the XML element and you don't need to worry
about distributing the custom classes.
Any thoughts?
Sanjesh
"Trang K. Duong" wrote:
> Hi Ed,
>
> I agree. When I wrote my service using custom classes and realized that how
> clients from other galaxies could have the custom classes on hand. I changed
> all i/o arguments to parameter: name/value. It's long and tedious, but it's
> more versatile, and best of all, it works.
>
> Thanks,
> trang
>
> > Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> > list-help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > list-unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > list-post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > From: Ed Keen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: usage of custom classes in requests
> > Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:41:48 -0500
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N
> >
> > I would like feedback on the whether or not any of you are using custom
> > classes in your soap calls. While it is definitely convenient on the Apache
> > server side (with its serializers & deserializers), it places an extra
> > burden on the client, because now they must have these custom classes on
> > their side too. For win32 clients, this becomes an even more difficult
> > task. Our company would probably wind up writing a DLL that would contain
> > the analog of our custom classes for Windows. So, whenever the interface
> > for these classes changes (say we add a new required field), we would have
> > to redistribute the client classes. This could become a distribution
> > nightmare.
> >
> > I am wondering if it would be less trouble to just have the clients send all
> > their data as separate parameters (which could make for a long parameter
> > list, I know) to some proxy-type servlet on the server-side which would
> > intercept the soap call, package that data into our custom classes, and send
> > the request on its way. It's more work on the server-side, but it would
> > avoid the need to distribute these custom serailizable client classes.
> >
> > Does any of that make sense? What are the rest of you doing in regards to
> > this? Please don't tell me to use WSDL. Been there. Tried that.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ed
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Trang K Duong
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 650-604-3989 (P) 650-604-2238 (F)
> ELORET - Thermosciences Institute
> NASA Ames Research Center
> M/S 258-1
> Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000
> http://www.eloret.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
