Scott,
I am very interesting in this topic and are looking for your help.
If my Java Bean has other objects as the data type and inner classes,
Do I need to type mapping for all the other classes which are used in
this Java Bean in deployment descriptor?
How about the inner class?
Do I need to write customized serializes for each object classes which
are used in this Java Bean?
Do you have any bean serialize examples I can take a look? Or any
places that have a good example?
Thanks,
Emily
At 03:54 PM 7/12/2002 -0400, Dunn, Scott wrote:
>I have type mappings and hence serialisers for all my classes, however, when
>serialising the return value Axis uses the xml type rather than the actual
>value type when determining which serialiser to use.
>
>I have solved the problem by writing a custom serialiser that figures out
>the 'real' class and delegates the serialisation to the appropriate
>serialiser as in the following code sample:
>
> public void serialize(QName name, Attributes
> attributes, Object value, SerializationContext
> context) // Check for meta-data in the bean that will tell us if any
> of the // properties are actually attributes, add those to the
> element // attribute list AttributesImpl beanAttrs
> = (AttributesImpl)getObjectAttributes(value, attributes,
> context); // We need to update the xsi:type attribute which is
> currently set to // ManagedEntityValue or ManagedEntityKey. It needs
> to be updated to // reflect the actual type of the object being
> serialized. QName actualXmlType =
> context.getQNameForClass(value.getClass()); int index =
> beanAttrs.getIndex("xsi:type"); beanAttrs.removeAttribute(index);
> beanAttrs =
>(AttributesImpl)context.setTypeAttribute((Attributes)beanAttrs,
>actualXmlType); // Now get the serializer for the actual Java type and
>delegate the // serialization to it. Serializer ser =
>context.getSerializerForJavaType(value.getClass()); ser.serialize(name,
>attributes, value, context);
>Scott.
>
> > ----------
> > From: Stickley, Jim
> > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 12:37 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: Serialization of return values and inheritance
> > hierarchies
> >
> > Do you define a Serializer in your deploy.wsdd file for all your classes,
> > or
> > just the abstract class? I'm not sure if this will fix your problem, but
> > I
> > believe that Axis will only serialize the classes that are specified in
> > the
> > wsdd file. The only thing I'm not sure of is if Axis will match the class
> > being returned to the correct serializer based on the type specified by
> > the
> > return or by the actual type. You will find out for sure if you have
> > serializers defined for all the concrete class types.
> >
> > Jim Stickley
> > Birch Telecom
> > (816) 300-6743
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dunn, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:10 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Serialization of return values and inheritance hierarchies
> >
> > I have a very granular interface which defines a small number of
> > operations
> > (5) on a large number of entities ( > 100). Rather than having an
> > interface
> > that defines more than 500 methods I have all the entities extend a base
> > class and define the interface in terms of the base class. By ensuring
> > that
> > all the required type mappings exist in the deployment descriptor this
> > works
> > fine for the request portion of the message. i.e. Axis correctly figures
> > out
> > how to deserialize the parameters that are passed in the SOAP message even
> > though the operation is defined in terms of the base class. However, the
> > return value does not work in the same fashion. Axis does not pay any
> > attention to the actual class of the return value and instead uses the
> > operation definition only, which results in all the properties being lost.
> >
> > Should this be the case? Is it not reasonable to expect that Axis would
> > serialize the object according to its actual class?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Scott.
> >
> >
