> > We already support those from some transports (e.g. JMS) but each
> > transport defines its own way of handling these things,
>
> This is not clear to me , what each transport does is depending on the
> content type it get the correct builder and asked him to build the Axiom
> . And the transport will give the input stream to the builder.
>
> When it come to write to the wire , transport will pick the correct
> message formatter and give him the output stream and the Axiom and that
> guy will serialize the message accordingly .
> > and so I can't
> > be sure that a message coming in as binary/jms can go out correctly as
> > binary/http post.
> >
> You mean you want to know the exact wire format ?

No. I guess I wasn't very clear about the relationship with
transports. Let me try to be clearer.

At the moment, if you send a binary message into Axis2 over JMS then
it goes into a wrapper element:
<soap:body>
   <axis2ns:jmsMessage>LAKJDF98ADFHASDLKJDFALKJ==</axis2ns:jmsMessage>
</soap:body>

In addition there is a property set to indicate this is a BytesMessage
(e.g. binary).

Now, if I create a FileTransport that also deals with binary files,
and it looks/sets binary data into a default wrapper:
<soap:body>
  <axis2ns:fileMessage>DlKjlkajsdlkj982w3lhjasdljkh0==</axis2ns:fileMessage>
</soap:body>

Now I need to write a mediator to change the element name - simply in
order to map between these two transports. Also I have to write logic
to find out what type of message it is and whether there really is a
wrapper element.

Instead, I'm suggesting we have a well-defined element QName for any
binary content *regardless* of which transport it came in through our
goes out of.

Is that clearer?

Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to