Gregg, If a service takes a parameter as List<SomeType> this will be mapped to a complexType of SomeType with maxoccure = -1
the content of SomeType will then be exposed by other complex types in the same schema. At least the practice prototype is behaving like this. At the same time, I have seen that a some attributes of a customized type ( a custom class) has not become visible if it doesn't have bean convention accessors, this is why I think its risky to fully rely on reading of complex Type and then client will not have full understanding of SomeType by just parsing wsdl. This however this is a problem for dynamic access to services that have either List<SomeType> or SomeType on its own, as a parameter. Sasan ________________________________ From: Gregg Wonderly <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 10:32:39 PM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: good or bad practice? or maybe ugly Sasan wrote: > I'm sorry that I have to talk technology oriented. In this particular > case the client only has access to abstract contract i.e WSDL. So if > list includes the type i.e. List<SomeType> , it is possible to identify > the content structure of "SomeType" but it seems to be very risky > because based on some prototypes, some of the content might not be > discovered if "SomeType" do not fully comply with a java bean convention > (having getter/setter for all attributes). this is only for dynamic > access to services I fail to understand how the SomeType being "known" because it is in the declaration as List<SomeType> has any baring on "risky". No matter what type of object is in the List, it has to be a usable "type" for the application. If you are using some non-native transport technology such as XML driven by some kind of packaging standard such as WSDL, than your objects have to allow you to construct the needed content. If you need JavaBean conventions supported, than it doesn't matter what type of object that is does it? There really is no reason that adding type information would make things more risky it seems to me. Gregg Wonderly
