moraleslos wrote:
> 
> Anyway, I got rid of my little test harness (mainly due to frustration) so
> I won't be able to try out Aegis.  Either way, I'd like to stick with
> JAXB2 since we can expose our domain model for other things too, and I'm
> getting pretty familiar with its annotations (great stuff).
> 

The thing is that with aegis binding you can do annotations like with jaxb2.
In fact, they are pretty much the same except that jaxb2 gives more
possibilities. Using aegis annotations instead of jaxb2 didn't change my
development approach.


moraleslos wrote:
> 
> As for the Web Service style, I think I did use wrapped.  I always thought
> wrapped was better than doc or rpc.  Its more verbose so shouldn't it be
> preferred?
> 

No idea. I just read something on the dev mailing list to change the default
from wrapped to document, so I guessed going with document would be more
future proof. Don't know of the pros and cons.
Possibly someone else can comment on this?


moraleslos wrote:
> 
> Yes, I do agree with you on the code-first route.  I always think that our
> domain model should be controlled by us and hence will have everything
> else reflect it one way or another.  Therefore I prefer the domain -->
> schema/wsdl instead of vice-versa and hence will keep the domain model
> clean and precise.  All incoming data that will be contained in our domain
> must go through a xsl transformation process and templates are easy to
> define.  I'm not a big fan of schema/wsdl --> domain objects simply
> because of all the garbage the domain objects contain.  If we are dealing
> with objects other than the domain, and if these objects can be considered
> *throw-away", then I would not mind the schema-first route.
> 

Depends on I'd say. I definitely see the benefit of having the schema
defined in cases like these where the schema is part of the actual contract
between the services. Howver, I've never really liked auto-generated classes
and would therefore like to be able to define how to bind my manually
created/designed pojos to a schema.
However, in this case as we're using smx internally within a system and I'm
therefore thinking that having the schema defined using annotations in the
domain pojos would be ok. We haven't settled on this though.

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/connecting-to-jsr-181-jaxb2-tf2523299s12049.html#a7486735
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to