> The job of the MessageReceiver is to take a "normalized" message (i.e. > something that looks like SOAP) and "do some valid work" with it - so > this might mean mapping to a Java method and databinding, or calling > out to a piece of hardware, or handing the contents of the body to a > cached instance of a particular class. It's the job of the earlier > parts of the system - the transport code, the Builder, etc - to map > the real wire message to the normalized form. > > If we're using the MessageReceiver to do things like pull data from > query parameters, then I put forth that we've designed that system > incorrectly, and should fix it. Some earlier chunk of code should do > this. Yes , I agree with you. When it come to the MR you should have everything you need in the OMElement. If the service need some more data it can take that from the message context.
Deepal > > Thanks, > --Glen > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: >> Deepal, the REST "deserialization" requires one to know the binding >> to know where to pull stuff from (query params, payload etc.). See >> WSDL 2.0 HTTP binding to understand how that works. >> >> So that has to happen post-dispatch. >> >> Sanjiva. >> >> Deepal jayasinghe wrote: >>>> It is possible that a single POJO (for example) can offer both a >>>> RESTful interface and a normal SOAP interface. In fact, that can >>>> happen by having both JAX-RS and JAX-WS annotations on the same pojo. >>> Well even without having those annotation we can expose a POJO as a >>> SOAP >>> and REST. I mean REST and SOAP just the wire format , internally what >>> happen is everything get converted into SOAP and at the end POJO class >>> receive a SOAP message. >>>> We currently can't handle that because the message receiver is >>>> associated with the AxisOperation and not BindingOperation. IMO that >>>> was a mistake .. >>> Well no , because BindingOperation introduced after the >>> AxisOperation :) . >>>> So what we talked about was to introduce the ability to set the MR on >>>> the binding operation but to keep the ability to set it on the >>>> operation itself. That allows us to be totally backwards compatible >>>> but it solve the problem for wanting both a RESTful and a WS-* binding >>>> for the same operation for example. >>> I can not still understand why we need new MR , because at the core >>> what >>> we use is SOAP not anything else , and at the end I mean at the >>> Transport sender level we serialize that to REST or SOAP. Which is done >>> by Message formatters. >>> >>> -Deepal >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Sanjiva. >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Thank you! http://blogs.deepal.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
