It's difficult to tell if a string is a plain text, XML or JSON without additional information such as the JAX-RS consumes/produces annotations which provide the media type behind the java type. It's also true for some generic java types such as InputStream or OutputStream. I have been thinking of enhancing the databinding framework to take these info into consideration (similar as JAX-RS MessageBodyReader or MessageBodyWriter), but I don't have enough time to work on it :-(
Raymond Feng Sent from my iPhone On Aug 17, 2011, at 4:09 AM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I'm (still) looking at the various JIRA related to enabling support > for interface matching across the domain. I wrote a simple test [1] to > compare obviously (to me) miss-matching interfaces. To my surprise it > was the local variant that failed. Now the service interface here is > @Remoteable. and differs in the type of the input parametner. > > String foo(String str); > vs > String foo(ParameterObject po); > > The test fails because our InterfaceContractMapper thinks that these > are compatible. It does this because when comparing the XMLType that > is the logical type of each it finds that one has a type (string) and > one is set to null. It seems that this happens because databinding > can't guess at an XML type for ParameterObject and the default java > Object is compatible with string. I note that the databinding string > is set differently. One to java.lang.String and one to > java.ComplexType. > > If the interface is WSDL you get different results. Presumably because > the XML type is easy to determine in that case. > > It seems that there are some inconsistencies inside the databinding > model that I hadn't considered. Can anyone tell my how the model is > intended to work in this respect and what problem cases exist. > > Regards > > Simon > > [1] > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/testing/itest/interface-matching/ > > -- > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
