Hi Ant,
I'm having trouble figuring out where you are coming down on this -
maybe I'm just brain-dead this morning. You mention at the beginning
that you are starting to be persuaded by the SDO approach but then
you give the Axis example at the end which seems to say either "keep
things simple" (i.e. StAX) or adopt a mixed approach and use StAX and
SDO where appropriate. Am I reading this right?
FWIW, I'd prefer to stick with one approach whatever it is, since
multiple ones brings complexity and more maintenance in an area we
probably don't need it (it's just configuration).
Jim
On Mar 23, 2006, at 7:13 AM, ant elder wrote:
On 3/23/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/>
As the binding itself uses JAXB2 (though it may change in
the future), I have to include all eclipse dependencies and SDO
stuff,
just to load the system configuration files :(
From the discussion I'm starting to be persuaded by some of the
arguments
for the SDO approach, but this EMF dependency seems a draw back. If
we're
going to support alternate data bindings for the WS binding its not
great to
still be dragging in EMF to run the thing. And I'd guess it would
be much
easier to sell SDO to say the Axis2 guys to use instead of XmlBeans
if there
was a pure Java SDO impl. Any Axis2 guys listening who'd comment on
this?
As another comparison look at Axis2, they have their own very
simple Axis
Data Binding (ADB) which supports simple XSDs, and they use
XmlBeans for all
the complicated stuff. They don't use XmlBeans all the time because
lots of
things don't need the complexity a full blown data binding brings.
And as
Guillaume points out, the SCA binding schema are usually pretty
simple.
...ant
