If you are in doubt about how much recent architectural changes may have affected (or killed) OM performance please look at the following test results:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/webservices/axis/trunk/archive/java/scratch/dasarath/om/$1/ --Dasarath --- Eran Chinthaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > This will some relate to the thread "Doubt on Detail > Element in SOAPFault". > > AXIOM was not meant to check the compliance with > SOAP spec or anything else. > It will just hold the infoset. The reason behind me > putting a SAAJ like api > on top of OM was to provide developer convenience. > For example, rather than > saying element.getFirstElement(), developers love to > use > envelope.getHeader(). So, that was the intention of > providing that sort of > SOAP jargon in to Axiom. This was our initial idea. > > But later, some have put some checks in to the AXIOM > SOAP api. And the > earlier thread also was asking about this > validation. > > So I have a small question on this. What should we > have in AXIOM ?? > > 1. Shall we "KISS" Axiom, and let it be just a info > set holder. > - If this is the case, this will not affect the > performance, due to > validation and stuff. And if we make it like this > how we gonna provide > validation or do we need to provide validation. Can > we leave this up to the > user ? > 2. Shall we make AXIOM SOAP stuff do validation on > SOAP 1.1 spec as well. > - This will definitely affect the performance. > > > IMHO, I prefer option 1, which is basically my > initial idea as well. > > What do you all think about this ? > > > Thanks, > Eran Chinthaka > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
