Feel free to ignore this.  I'm writing a new question with more specifics.

--- In [email protected], "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ok, I guess what I've done for now was open some of the Framework
> classes, like SOAPDecoder.as and XMLDecoder.as, and place some
> strategic breakpoints.  It would be nice to have a little more tracing
> inside these.  I guess I can look into figuring out how to build some
> of the framework swc, like the rpc stuff that I'm currently using.
> 
> I think I found my problem in XMLDecoder::decodeSequence and
> XMLDecoder::decodeGroupElement.  Does anyone know that when an WSDL
> element is defined as a Sequence, if flex needs every element to be
> present to decode it properly?  (I'm aware that they all should be in
> the proper order...but I'm not aware that the server response should
> be returning a lot of null items for values that aren't being returned.)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Todd" <tprekaski@> wrote:
> >
> 
> 
> 
> > Hello All,
> >   I'm using the new Flex 3 ShchemaTypeRegistry to map my XSD Schema
> > types returned in Soap Results with value objects on my application
> > side of things.
> > I have application tracing set to "0", so I can see the SoapResult
> > coming off the wire.  But for the rest of the logging information from
> > the framework, all I see is:
> > Decoding SOAP response
> > Encoded SOAP response <SOAP-ENV:Envelope ...[truncated by me for
> posting]
> > Decoding SOAP response envelope
> > Decoding SOAP response headers
> > Decoding SOAP response body
> > Decoded SOAP response into result [2 millis]
> > 
> > What are some techniques you guys use to debug when things go wrong
> > with SchemaType mapping?
> > 
> > Right now, all I see in the result is that my data.result is of the
> > proper type, but all the properties are set to their default values. 
> > I'm assuming something didn't map well with the TypeRegistry.properly.
> > 
> > My VOs have a few levels of Objects, i.e.,
> > Customer.customerOrders.lineItems.
> > Thanks.
> >
>


Reply via email to