Hi,
I have a route like the following:
From(sjms2)
.unmarshal().jaxb("myjaxbpackage")
When I send an XML message with the following content
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
... Rest of XML content here ...
To the sjms2 endpoint, any Danish characters (e.g. ø) in the message get
mangled. The Camel message body in this example is a String.
Looking at the unmarshal implementation, it looks like Camel forces messages to
InputStream (seemingly with UTF-8 encoding by default) before passing them to
the JAXB data format. See
https://github.com/apache/camel/blob/3312243b32af03ac39c3af170e318f03e01d64f0/core/camel-support/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/support/processor/UnmarshalProcessor.java#L56
I can work around this by converting the message body to a Latin-1 InputStream
before unmarshalling, or by setting the encoding property on the data format,
but I'm wondering why Camel is implemented this way? For at least JAXB
unmarshalling, there is no reason to serialize a String to InputStream before
handing it off to JAXB, and it is less flexible than just passing the String to
JAXB, as my code now needs to decide the input message's charset, which JAXB
would otherwise handle for me.
In the current code, the serialization looks to be necessary because
DataFormat.unmarshal takes an Exchange and an InputStream. Wouldn't it be more
flexible to only pass the Exchange to the DataFormat, and leave the
implementation free to check whether the message is already a format it can
process before trying to serialize to bytes? For instance, the JAXB data format
could check whether the input is a Reader or a String, and use the matching
JAXB Unmarshaller methods.
