Ajith and Chathura, If i want to write a DII kind of client which doesn't use any static stubs, then isn't it too much work to write the databinding code on my own? I was expecting a version of Call.invoke() which can take Object[]. Is this not in our wish list? What's our approach to support RPC encoding?
- venkat On 7/26/05, Chathura Herath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yup. The data binding is interfaced to the engine through the Message > receiver that will also be generated. Serialization and deserialization is > handled by the data binding framework. > > > > Chathura > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Ajith Ranabahu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 2:05 PM > To: [email protected]; jayachandra > Subject: Re: [Axis2]Databinding Notes > > > > > Hi Jaya, > Well. You are quite right. Right now core has no such dependancy on the > databinding. The idea is to incorporate databound objects when skeletons are > code generated. Our plan is to generate the databound objects, skeletons and > the relevant message receiver when skeletons are generated. > The marshaller and unmarshaller are built into the generated objects. To be > exact we use our builders and the provided XML stream reader from the > generated objects to marshall and unmarshall objects. > > > On 7/26/05, jayachandra <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Ajith et al, > > In axis2 there is some databinding code present, but looks that only > codegen of wsdl module is using it and not any other module like core > etc. seems like using it. The existing typemapping framework is > registering only the xml type and java type names in the map, and with > just that much information it becomes tough to actually output a java > object out of a xml element and vice versa. Without marshaller and > unmarshallers registered for the types, can it be possible? If inside > the 'core' module code, we wish to data bind the parameters back and > forth (which would be a natural thing to do as we aim to support > operations other than those which accept and output just OMElements, > correct me if I'm wrong here!) how can that be done? > > Thank you > Jaya > -- > -- Jaya > > > > > -- > Ajith Ranabahu
