Hi, On 30 nov. 2011, at 11:59, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> Hi > On 30/11/11 09:29, Diana ALLAM wrote: >> Hello, >> thank you for your reply. >> >> Currently, I am doing a study about well dynamic typing of web service and I >> choose cxf >> to run some examples. >> In fact, for SOAP/WS* services, there is a standard used , wsdl files, which >> are generated by a web service. >> A client can use this wsdl to generate an appropriated interface in java to >> build an appropriated request to >> the designed web service. Thus, I can say, following this way, there must >> not be any typing errors. >> But for Restful services, the situation differs a bit. There is a WADL files >> to describe the web services like the >> WSDL files in SOAP/WS*, but WADL still not a standard. > > it's a W3C submission and it appears users who work with RESTful services and > happen to see the benefit of providing the documents such as WADL just use > WADL; Yes, but I mean that WADL is not yet used by all Restful services like the WSDL for WS* > >> My question is, if a restful web service doesn't define a WADL, thus the >> client can't generate in java the appropriated >> classes (like using wadltojava), then how he can know the type of messages? >> I suppose that in the absence of a WADL for a web service, there is a text >> description file describing all methods and >> there messages types. Thus, the client has to read this document to know how >> to build his messages. >> Here, he can make mistakes by sending to a restful resource an inappropriate >> data. >> >> Is my reasoning correct about that? > That may not be that big an issue actually - unless we are talking about the > completely generic clients, but indeed, with the fluent HTTP-centric API one > just needs to apply a bit more care to making sure the correct messages are > sent and such - but as I said if the code > were not corect it work it would fail at the first try, then the user would > go and check the SLA or whatever and update the code. > In CXF we support both styles: > http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jax-rs-client-api.html > so choose the option you like or experiment with both ones > > Proxies can also be generated from the existing WADLs: > http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jaxrs-services-description.html > > even WSDLs can be used as the input (this option is a bit more involved) Thank you a lot for these informations. I can deduce that from the client developer side, calling a WS* web service is more standardized than a restful one, because the user can get a WSDL and creates properly a proxy, while for Rest it will not be the case if no Wadl is provided. In your opinion, isn't it an advantage for WS*? Doesn't it an annoying checking problem for restful's clients? Will WADL be defined for all Restful services in the coming days, such as WSDL for WS* services today? Regards, Diana > Sergey >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Diana >> >> On 29 nov. 2011, at 18:01, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> On 29/11/11 15:33, Diana ALLAM wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> After using the restful examples in the "samples" directory of cxf >>>> distribution, I distinguished >>>> two types of restful request for "put/post" CRUD methods. >>>> 1) the first one is by sending a request with an xml object description >>>> (samples -> jax_rs -> basic) >>>> Follows, there is a part of the code example for calling the put method by >>>> using an input file containing the "customer" xml code: >>>> // Sent HTTP PUT request to update customer info >>>> System.out.println("\n"); >>>> System.out.println("Sent HTTP PUT request to update customer >>>> info"); >>>> Client client = new Client(); >>>> String inputFile = >>>> client.getClass().getResource("update_customer.xml").getFile(); >>>> URIResolver resolver = new URIResolver(inputFile); >>>> File input = new File(resolver.getURI()); >>>> PutMethod put = new >>>> PutMethod("http://localhost:8080/CustomerRestfullTest/jaxrs/customerservice/customers";); >>>> RequestEntity entity = new FileRequestEntity(input, "text/xml; >>>> charset=ISO-8859-1"); >>>> put.setRequestEntity(entity); >>>> HttpClient httpclient = new HttpClient(); >>>> >>>> try { >>>> int result = httpclient.executeMethod(put); >>>> System.out.println("Response status code: " + result); >>>> System.out.println("Response body: "); >>>> System.out.println(put.getResponseBodyAsString()); >>>> >>>> System.out.println(put.getResponseHeader(Message.ENDPOINT_ADDRESS)); >>>> } finally { >>>> // Release current connection to the connection pool once you >>>> are >>>> // done >>>> put.releaseConnection(); >>>> } >>>> >>> >>> This is a very old code that will be replaced >>> >>>> 2) the second one is by using an instance of a Java class, here is >>>> Customer, instead of getting data from an input file (samples -> jax_rs >>>> -> basic_https) >>>> >>>> WebClient wc = WebClient.create(BASE_SERVICE_URL, >>>> CLIENT_CONFIG_FILE); >>>> Customer customer = new Customer(); >>>> customer.setId(123); >>>> customer.setName("Mary"); >>>> Response resp = wc.put(customer); >>>> >>>> >>>> I prefer to use the second method because in the first method, >>>> a developer could make mistakes in his input file, then the server will >>>> reply by a fault message, while the second >>>> method allows to avoid such errors as there is a customer object conform >>>> to a specified class Customer. >>>> >>>> I think also the second method is more adapted if the client wishes using >>>> a wadl file, then by using wadltojava, all the appropriated classes >>>> are generated (like the Customer class in my previous example). >>> Agreed >>>> But my question is, when and why a developer need to use the first method? >>> >>> If developers do prefer using Apache HttpClient for whatever reasons then >>> they may want to use that API >>> >>> Cheers, Sergey >>> >>>> And by such a use, the developer doesn't take the risk of sending >>>> inadapted data to the server? >>>> and how the developer knows which data description form (for the customer >>>> example, it is an xsd) he must use in this case, if he doesn't have a wadl? >>>> because I suppose that if he had a wadl then he must use the second method. >>>> >>>> Thank you in advance. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Diana >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sergey Beryozkin >>> >>> Talend Community Coders >>> http://coders.talend.com/ >>> >>> Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com >> > > > -- > Sergey Beryozkin > > Talend Community Coders > http://coders.talend.com/ > > Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
