Right now its done very inefficiently, in effect converting between SDO an
AXIOM means serializing to a byte array. Have a look at the on going thread
"Data flow on a wire", and also
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-118

   ...ant

On 3/22/06, Edward Slattery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have done some preliminary work on SDO integration with axis2C, and have
> talked to some of the axis2c people about the work. There are two areas I
> see that we could be worked on.
>
> The first is a conversion from an SDO data graph to a tree of AXIOM
> objects.
> This could be done by taking SDOXMLWriter for inspiration, and replacing
> the
> actual writing to XML part with a creation of an AXIOM element or
> attribute.  We could then flow SDOs over axis2c, and provided we had the
> same data factory at the other end, could re-build them with an
> SDOAxiomReader utility.
> I also assume (maybe wrongly) that there is nothing preventing me using
> the
> SDOAxiomWriter to write XSD information, so we could flow both the data
> and
> the metadata if required.
>
> The second area of interest is the guththila parser. I have tested that it
> can replace our libxml2 parser, and it seems to be capable of doing that.
> We
> could investigate having a kind of pluggable parser layer, and switch
> parsers between libxml2 and guththila. We would have to work out the best
> way of integrating - I.E take a copy of guththila and build with it, or
> have
> axis2c as a dependency of SDO for C++?  The second is cleaner, but I
> imagine
> the PHP group might want the option of building SDO with only libxml2 for
> now.
>
> I would be interested to know how the integration of the java SDO is being
> handled. Anyone aware?
>
>
> On 21/03/06, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The current SCA C++ implementation supports webservice binding using
> Axis
> > 1.x (there are some outstanding problems with this). I would like to
> move
> > up
> > to use Axis2C.
> >
> > One way to do this is to discard the Axis 1.x binding code and replace
> > with
> > Axis2C. A better way would be to restructure the code to allow bindings
> to
> > be more pluggable. As a starting point I think it would be useful, as
> > discussed on another thread, to have a Wiki page outlining the current
> > code
> > architecture/structure which would be of use for anyone who would like
> to
> > help out.
> >
> > As part of this it would also be really good to have an SDO C++
> > integration
> > with Axis2C.
> >
> > Pete
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to