ARGH I hate it :( .. would we not be creating a parallel structure to MessageContext? I suggest (1) and pass the MC into the serialization stuff? I any case, whether to gen the xml decl could depend on the transport (think http vs tcp) and then you need the MC to know the transport.
Sanjiva. On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 12:18 +0530, Shahi, Ashutosh wrote: > +1 to the main idea. This is how even SAAJ manages XML declaration and > character encoding. > > > > Ashutosh > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > From: Eran Chinthaka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 6:50 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Axis2] SOAPMessage > > > > > Hi all, > > > > Current source, we have only the SOAPEnvelope that contains the soap > message. But IMO, I think its better to have SOAPMessage as well to > contain XML Declaration, Encoding, etc., > > So that when sending a message transport will get the output from > SOAPMessage.serialize, not SOAPEnvelope.serialize. > > > > Here are the evaluations of other alternations to solve the above > problem. > > > > 1. put those stuff in message context. > > Serializing code is in the envelope and it doesn't have access to the > message context. If someone needs to serialize he must be able to do > it without having a message context. > > 2. Put this information in OMOutputImpl. This is not practical as we > create a new OMOutputImpl whenever we want to serialize. So I don't > think it’s a good idea to have state within the OMOutputImpl. > > > > So what do you all think about this suggestion. This may involve some > changes to the code. > > > > Regards, > > Chinthaka > > > >
