Thanks for the explanation. However, I think there are some cases where this behavior can potentially cause problems. I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3120 and put the details there.
Andrew From: Simon Laws <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 06/18/2009 10:59 AM Subject: Re: JMS binding processor, does not preserve file structure? On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Andrew Mak<[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey Scott, > > So when you say "issues", do you mean that this is a bug that's intended to > be fix at some point? (is there a jira? I can open one if there isn't). Or > is this pretty working as designed? > > Thanks, > > Andrew > > > From: Scott Kurz <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 06/17/2009 08:25 PM > Subject: Re: JMS binding processor, does not preserve file structure? > ________________________________ > > > Andrew, > > I don't think there is any such option and I think we have other > similar issues where read/write produces equivalent but different XML, > for example with certain defaults like the wireFormat (whether the > default is explicitly specified or not,we'll still write out the > default element). > > Scott > > > Hi Andrew What you are seeing of course is the defaults that Tuscany uses in the model if no input is provided. To write out only what was read in we would have to keep some flags indicating which fields are default values and which fields were specified by the user. We don't do that at the moment. Simon
