The current SAAJ Impl does NOT create a parellel tree. It just delegates much of the work to the embedded OM objects. For example, SOAPEnvelopeImpl does NOT contain references to SOAPBodyImpl and SOAPHeaderImpl, but has one private instance variable of type org.apache.axis.om.SOAPEnvelope. Same strategy is followed for other clasess as well.Sanjiva, can you give more detial on the factory technique usage here.
Also SAAJ impl allows conversion between OM and SAAJ version of SOAP objects (SOAPEnvelope, SOAPBody etc). Ashutosh will post more details on the current SAAJ implementation. - venkat On 5/17/05, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 19:22 +0000, Ruchith Fernando wrote: > > With the proposed solution I think we can get away from having two > > object strctures (OM and DOM) at the same time. But I think I can try > > to go ahead with what is there is in SAAJ impl without much of a > > problem :-) > > Wait, does the current SAAJ impl basically create a parallel tree?? If > so I'm against doing it that way .. the clever factory technique allows > us to not have two trees around and is hence preferable. The SAAJ impl > should extend that to add SAAJ support (thru the same technique). > > Sanjiva. > >
