Personally, I prefer to use Jersey vs GWT RPC because it is more flexible and exposes standard interfaces. For instance, in our group there are both Java and C# guys, so if our webservices have the ability to support multiple standards everyone can use them. I have Jersey set up so that depending on the Accept header it will serve your either XML, JSON or Java serialization. Also, with very little work I can also create SOAP services. I think GWT-RPC is a very nice protocol and is nice for people on small project or don't have to worry about flexability or external interfaces and have complete control of all design decisions in their project, but when you are working in large groups where you don't always have a say in all potential interfaces, then it is better to just use open standards. I have done a few personal GWT projects where I have used RPC, so I am not against it by any means.
On Jul 15, 12:10 pm, David Vree <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't want to hijack your thread, but I am new to this and am > wondering why you don't use GWT-RPC to do the client/server > communication? > > On Jul 15, 12:40 pm, lineman78 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It is not possible to convert POJO to XML without using some sort of > > library, but Jersey does have the ability to do JSON. I use JAXB to > > generate my server side classes and JAX-RS to marshal to XML and JSON > > depending on the Accepts header. This is fairly easy to do using a > > services context resolver annotated with provider and consumes/ > > produces application/json. I then have written a generator(no I can't > > provide it, but it is possible) so that I can write an interface for a > > POJO and it will generate the overlay type for me, but if you are > > working on a smaller project manually writing the overlay types is the > > best solution. > > > On Jul 15, 8:27 am, chris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thank you for the advice and it appears that this would work for > > > server but not for client marshalling. I have been investigating a way > > > to use JAXB to marshall soap requests on the client side but have not > > > found a way as of yet. I would love to get rid of soap all together > > > but unfortunately that will not be possible. Has anyone found a way to > > > marshall the POJO to XML on the client? > > > > Thanks, > > > Chris Hinshaw > > > > On Jul 15, 1:27 am, Frederic Conrotte <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > There is no problem in using JAXB along with GWT. > > > > > See this thread for > > > > explanations:http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4020&q=J... > > > > > On Jul 15, 2:57 am, Shyam Visamsetty <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I think you cannot use JAXB with GWT. JAXB uses a lot of classes which > > > > > GWT cant compile. So, you may not be able to use it. You can use the > > > > > standard xml packages that come with GWT. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Shyam Visamsetty. > > > > > > On Jul 14, 8:29 am, Alberto Rugnone <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have to use classes with jaxb annotation on client side, but GWT > > > > > > compiler refuse to work throwing following exception > > > > > > > No source code is available for type javax.xml.namespace.QName > > > > > > No source code is available for type javax.xml.bind.JAXBElement<T> > > > > > > > etc... > > > > > > > someone can help me > > > > > > > Thank you very much in advanced -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
