Thanks Benson. One more question: Say if I decide not to use Aegis mapping file, how will I know that I am using Aegis databinding. I have already set my client and server code to use Aegis databinding (setDatabinding(..)). But how will I ensure that I am indeed using Aegis and not other databinding. Is there any way to test?
Thx Raj On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]>wrote: > 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 > > >
