Re: rpc/literal vs document/literal, and returning a list of objects

[Praveen Peddi]

But what about the doc/literal issues related to returning array of beans. 
Wouldn't Dan hit the wall at some point. Atleast I hit the wall when I tried 
to move towards doc/literal. We were using rpc/encoded style before and 
everything was working great. When I read that rpc/encoded has permance 
problems I tried to move to doc/literal style (actually wrapped/literal) but 
I was stuck with returning arrays issue. My .NET client doesn't serialize 
the beans at all. I read the Eric's thread and other email threads related 
to this issue but could not really come up with a solution.

Praveen
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anne Thomas Manes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: rpc/literal vs document/literal, and returning a list of 
objects


And just to clarify...
The difference between doc/literal and wrapped/literal is in the way
you invoke the service -- the contents on the wire (the structure of
the SOAP message) will be identical.
In doc/literal, you input an object (javabean), and you return an
object (javabean). In wrapped/literal, you input parameters, and you
return an object. Wrapped/literal is a programming convention that
make doc/literal look like rpc/literal.
Don't use rpc/literal because .NET doesn't support it.
Regards,
Anne
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:55:36 +0000, Tom Oinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dan,
My suggestion would be to use document / literal style. The data
structure you describe is easy to define as an XML schema (by hand if
you must, but I'd use something like XMLSpy). You can then create the
requisite WSDL file referencing this schema, generate the server side
Java classes against this and modify them to call the appropriate
methods on your existing EJB.
If you're using doc/literal style you'll also have to build a (very
simple) XSD type for your three inputs, in this case a simple sequence
with minoccurs and maxoccurs attributes set to 1.
I would definitely start with WSDL in any case, given that the WSDL
defines whether your service is WS-I compliant.
HTH,
Tom