Oleg, Am stating my personal pov why this is something i *personally* may not be interested in. Nothing more, nothing less. If anyone else wants to run with it, that's fine with me.
thanks, -- dims On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 12:22:17PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Oleg, >> >> One problem from my personal point of view is that for JAXWS support >> we need javamail :( to be compliant to the spec. >> >> -- dims >> > > Davanum, > > I understand your position, yet I find it regrettable that JAX-WS > specific requirements dictate architectural decisions for Axiom which is > meant a generic XML processing framework. I also find it regrettable > that Axiom is currently unable to parse and build MIME messages without > buffering the first MIME part (SOAP message) in memory. It may not be a > big problem for a great deal of applications, but for some it certainly > is. > > Oleg > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:54:33AM -0500, Thilina Gunarathne wrote: >> >> Hi Oleg,Apologies for been this late to reply... >> >> >> >> There is a little catch that you might need to consider.. Axis2 MIME >> >> parsing >> >> works similar to StAX. Axis2 MIME parser does differed parsing of the MIME >> >> messages. It parses MIME parts only when needed and requested by the AXIOM >> >> model. Axiom requests the contents of the attachments only when somebody >> >> reads the contents of the corresponding OMText object (not when it creates >> >> the object model). So altogether when using MTOM+ Axiom it's a double >> >> layer differed parsing, differed parsing of XML & differed parsing of >> >> Attachments. But to be honest I'm not sure whether there are any people >> >> taking advantage of this.. One reason for us not use the JavaMail was it's >> >> inability to do differed MIME parsing.. >> >> Also Axis2 supports streaming of attachments. That means somebody can >> >> directly stream the attachments stream from the input to the output. This >> >> comes handy when proxying or mediating. This case might become unusable (I >> >> can't really remember how it works now :(.. ) if we read and parse the >> >> whole >> >> MIME message.. Once again I'm not sure whether people really use it >> >> (Synapse??).. >> >> >> >> All and all I believe the ability to differed parse MIME attachments will >> >> be >> >> a good feature for MIME4J too.. >> >> >> > >> > Thilina, >> > >> > mime4j is perfectly capable of deferred (or on demand) parsing of MIME >> > messages. One can retrieve just the first mime part and then defer the >> > processing of all subsequent parts only when / if accessed. >> > >> > Presently the patch I submitted (WSCOMMONS-387) does not provide support >> > for the deferred parsing, but it should be relatively trivial to add it. >> > However, as no one showed any interest in WSCOMMONS-387 so far I am >> > somewhat reluctant to put any more work into it. >> > >> > Oleg >> > >> > >> >> thanks, >> >> Thilina >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Thilina, >> >> > >> >> > Mime4j parser works similarly to SAX. It is an event based API. One can >> >> > provide a custom handler implementing a particular custom processing >> >> > logic in response to appearance of a certain MIME element in the data >> >> > stream, such as a MIME header or a content part. >> >> > >> >> > Oleg >> >> > >> >> > > thanks, >> >> > > Thilina >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> Folks, >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> Would there be any interest in a SwA implementation based on Apache >> >> > > >> mime4j [1]? Mime4j can handle very complex MIME messages, is >> >> > reasonably >> >> > > >> fast, and, most importantly, can stream complex MIME messages in >> >> > > >> and >> >> > out >> >> > > >> with a predictable memory footprint (using just a small internal >> >> > buffer >> >> > > >> of a constant length) >> >> > > >> I _personally_ find Java Activation API pretty suboptimal and would >> >> > like >> >> > > >> Axiom to provide an alternative API based on a fully streamable >> >> > > >> model. >> >> > > >> Let me know what you think. >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> Oleg >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> [1] http://james.apache.org/mime4j/index.html >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > > -- >> >> > > > Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. >> >> > > > Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; >> >> > http://www.opensource.lk/ >> >> > > > Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ >> >> > > > Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ >> >> > > > Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Thilina Gunarathne - http://thilinag.blogspot.com >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com > -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
