Anthony Elder wrote:

I think this is getting a little confused.

I don't think this is to do with type mapping specifically. WSIF already
has mechanisms for user type mappings, this problem happens when the XML
type - Java class has been correctly established, and a SOAP response is
being deserialised into a Java object - its the individual fields within
that which need to be mapped, and thats what AXIS uses the TypeDesc
information for.

Ant,

i believe that current mechanism is too simple and do not address needs of more demanding WSIF users.

If AXIS was not used to generate the beans from the WSDL, (perhaps from the
JAXB jxc, or the WASP WSDLCompiler, neither of which use TypeDesc) then the
bean will not work with the WSIF AXIS provider.

in my opinion that indicates that WSIF is not very flexible and currently is dependent on AXIS and WSDL2Java.

i think that we need to look to make WSIF to work with other approaches to databinding as long as they can be made to work with WSLD4J.

What Jacques-Olivier originally pointed out was that  this makes WSIF
dependant on AXIS being used to generate the beans and thus the client code
dependant upon the chosen binding,  and this breaks the WSIF being binding
independent philosophy.

Actually the above scenario of using JAXB or WASP would work unless any of
the XML elements have names which start with a capital letter and this is
what I think makes it seem like a bug somewhere. If the XML had a
completely different name than the Java class field I  think it would be
fine that it didn't work, but when just the case of the 1st character
breaks it, it somehow makes it seems like a special case that should be
tolerated.

So as I see the options are:
1 - call this a limitation and do nothing
2 - design a way to add the required TypeDesc info to the WSDL binding and
get the WSIF AXIS provider to somehow get that from the binding and tell
the AXIS BeanDeserializer about it.
3 - make the case of the 1st character of XML names a special case that
should be tolerated by the WSIF AXISProvider

Does this sound right or have I misunderstood something?  Are there any
other options?

option 2 looks to me worth pursuing to get WSIF to be easier to integrate with other databinding solutions - we should not make WSIF too dependent on AXIS but rather keep possible to add other SOAP or XML providers (like for example XML RPC).

thanks,

alek

--
"Mr. Pauli, we in the audience are all agreed that your theory is crazy. What divides us is whether it is crazy enough to be true." Niels H. D. Bohr


Reply via email to