Hello Glen, See my response below.
Cheers Brian DePradine Web Services Development IBM Hursley External +44 (0) 1962 816319 Internal 246319 If you can't find the time to do it right the first time, where will you find the time to do it again? Glen Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 20/03/2007 17:11:58: > Hi folks: > > Why do we have a separate AddressingValidationHandler? Wouldn't it make > more sense simply to do any addressing-specific validation right in the > AddressingInHandler or the AddressingBasedDispatcher? Is it possible to > simplify this? I believe that historically the AddressingBasedDispatcher is not meant to be tied to strongly to ws-addressing. Hence it is not a part of the Addressing module :-(. This has meant the need to have a separate AddressingValidation handler. However, I believe that David is planning some refactoring of the dispatchers which may mean that we can revisit this. > Also, rather than having separate Handlers for the different versions of > addressing, wouldn't it make more sense to have just one > AddressingInHandler and then let that do version-specific work with its > own utility classes? A separate handler seems like overkill. I had considered refactoring the inbound processing into one handler, but elected not to do it in the end. At the time, I was taking the approach of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Now, I have no objections to doing it if folks feel that this is the best way to go. > > Thanks, > --Glen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
