Some people are estheticians of XML. They care. Some people are trying to make Aegis interoperate with other things. I personally don't recommend this, since it can't eat a WSDL, and you're left trying to make tweaks to the mapping file or @annotations to try to achieve compatibility.
If you are planning to run wsdl2java or some equivalent, controlling these names may get you much more readable code. On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Raj Floyd <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > What is the advantage of using Aegis mapping file? I went through the > samples that had Aegis example. The mapping file had the mapped name as > 'greeting'. The actual parameter name was 'text'. I ran the sample, saw the > generated WSDL where it reflected 'greeting' as a param name and the SOAP > payload also had the name 'greeting'. My question is: > > 1. Do we use mapping file to give some appropriate name to the method params > or return types say instead of 'arg0' or 'return' ? How does it help? Why > would I do it versus why can't I simply invoke my service method without > bothering about mapping file? (ofcourse with Aegis databinding). > > Thx > > Raj >
