Ah! I understand, now. At this point in time I'd prefer reflection over dd. I think I'd prefer a marker interface, too. Holders are inout unless they implement an OutOnlyHolder interface (or vice versa?). That way we can generate our holders with or without the marker. And we can have a set of primitive holders of our own that extend the JAX-RPC holders and implement the marker. (That way we wouldn't have to bring JAX-RPC in line with this idea just yet. I think they'd be very reluctant.)
This is just a quick thought. I haven't considered this too seriously, yet. Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam Ruby/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS on 02/12/2002 03:13:55 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: WSDL Interop Russell Butek wrote: > > I can understand how deployment descriptors would work, but I don't see how > reflection could solve our problem. Could you elaborate? Both would require invention and conventions. Example: define a subclass for each holder which is intended to be used for input only arguments. Or define static methods (e.g. getParameterMode analogous to the existing getParameterName) which can be used to determine the parameter mode. - Sam Ruby
