Hi Chathura,
Thanks for your comments so far. I'll post some tips on using the existing
Woden SVN code. Where can I see your most recent WSDL2 code....in the Axis2
CVS?
From our initial call with Dims, I was thinking that Axis would retain it's
WOM because of dependencies in the code parser, code generator, etc and
that Woden would have to somehow map it's WSDL model (2.0 and 1.1) into
the WOM via the Axis WSDLOM Builder or from the WOM via the Axis WSDL
Writer. And that it would have to do this with the Axis efficiency goals in
mind (deferred pull parsing, etc). Your proposal seems to mean moving the
WSDLOM Builder, the WSDL Writer and the WOM into Woden, which seems good
because it eliminates duplication and conversion, but it does mean your
internal Axis components become directly dependent on Woden. Woden will
have various users whose requirements will influence the API, so I wonder
if keeping your existing WOM inside Axis might help you manage the
dependencies of the Axis components that use it. I guess it depends on the
suitability and stability of the Woden WSDL API versus the complexity and
performance of some Woden-to-Axis WOM conversion.
The Woden API under development currently has some general framework
infrastructure in org.apache.woden, like the factory and reader, and then
the actual WSDL 2.0 model API under org.apache.woden.wsdl20.
We have been working on a WSDL 2.0 model API that has 2 'levels':
1) a pure WSDL 2.0 'component' model as per the Component Model in Part 1
of the 2.0 spec (in package org.apache.woden.wsdl20). This is an abstract
or 'flattened' view of the WSDL that hides XML details and the
import/include modularization. This model will be useful for read-only
scenarios where the service information is important, but not the
underlying XML or document composition (e.g. validating WSDL 2.0 semantic
rules).
2) a WSDL 2.0 'element' model that supports the XML Infoset representation
of the component model (in package org.apache.woden.wsdl20.xml). This
model would be more useful for read-write applications where the XML
details and structure are important. I think this is more like the WOM in
Axis2.
The WSDL API implementation is only just starting, but we were considering
a single implementation model to support both APIs, so that the 'component'
model API represents an abstract 'view' of the 'element' model.
We have considered mainly WSDL 2.0 so far, but as Lawrence pointed out,
with some consideration for 1.1 support and how to do this in a
version-independent way within the Woden framework (i.e. in the factory,
reader and writer mechanisms as well as in the WSDL model API itself).
The Axis WSDL Architecture wiki describes a WOM that is based on WSDL 2.0
but generic enough to accomodate wsdl 1.1 and I seem to remember seeing
some 1.1 features in the WOM code (can't remember specific examples). In
your comments below to Lawrence you proposed a WSDL 2.0 based component
model to handle both 1.1 and 2.0 wsdl. Do you mean a 'pure' 2.0 model that
faithfully reflects the 2.0 spec or were you considering a more generic
model that is 2.0 compliant but with 1.1 additions.... something like the
WOM?
It would be great if we can parse any 1.1 wsdl document into a pure 2.0
object model, but even with a generic model we should probably still
consider various use cases that may require different types of WSDL model:
1) WSDL4J/JWSDL users wanting to move to Woden but with gradual migration
of their WSDL may prefer to work with the JWSDL API initially (i.e. Woden
readWSDL returns a javax.wsdl.Definition).
2) new applications based on WSDL 2.0 only may prefer a pure WSDL 2.0 API
(i.e. Woden readWSDL returns a org.apache.woden.wsdl20.Description)
3) Applications like Axis that must support both 1.1 and 2.0 from common
tooling and deployment code will require a model (pure or generic 2.0) that
can accomodate both versions of wsdl.
We could try to merge 2 and 3 into a single model and support 1 as the
migration case to bring in the WSDL4J community. The key point is that they
all share the same high level API (factory, readWSDL methods, etc) provided
by the framework. The framework could determine the version of the WSDL
document its parsing, then return a wsdl model appropriate to some
user-specified property or API call (perhaps a Woden WSDL 2.0 model by
default, or a JWSDL model if requested).
Different strategies can be used for instantiating these WSDL models and
avoiding unnecessary conversions. For runtime efficiency, deferred pull
parsing (e.g. StAX in Axis). For development time flexibility, DOM-to-WSDL
model conversion (e.g. Xerces in Eclipse). Hence the support for different
XML parsers within the Woden framework.
What about reversability? The wiki describes 1.1 and 2.0 reversability
being preserved within the WOM so that a WOM created from a 1.1 document
will be serialized back to a 1.1 document (likewise for 2.0 documents). In
your comments to Lawrence you mention using serialization to convert from
the original 1.1 document to a 2.0 wsdl document. Does this mean we need to
support both requirements - preserving reversability where needed and
converting from 1.1 to 2.0 documents where appropriate?
regards,
John Kaputin
"Chathura Herath"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rce.lk> To
<[email protected]>
14/06/2005 07:23 cc
Subject
Please respond to RE: Axis2 and wooden
woden-dev
Hi Lawrence,
Please find my response inline.
>Hi Chathura,
>If I understand correctly you wrap WSDL 1.1 in a WSDL 2.0 model. Is that
correct? So what you're proposing is a way to >convert a WSDL 1.1 model
into
the Woden WSDL 2.0 API?
I am proposing to give a WSDL 2.0 based component model and to parse WSDL
1.1 files too, to our WSDL 2.0 based component model. So if we do a
serialization of our model (which was built from a 1.1 WSDL file) we ll be
doing the WSDL 1.1 to WSDL 2.0 conversion.
>John and I had a brief discussion when proposing Woden about how WSDL 1.1
and 2.0 can be made to play nicely together >in one project. At that point
we floated the idea of defining a WSDL 2.0 API in Woden and having one WSDL
parser that >can parse both WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0. A WSDL 1.1 document
would
be parsed and a WSDL 1.1 model using the JWSDL API >would be returned. A
WSDL 2.0 document would be parsed and a WSDL 2.0 model using the Woden WSDL
2.0 API would be >returned.
I agree.. Think it's too complicated to have a single model that implements
both the APIs. I am interested in a single model and possibly two parsers
for WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0.
>Is the primary goal of the Axis WOM to produce a single model, have a
single parser, or are both really the goals? As >WSDL 1.1 and 2.0 are
significantly different, do you think a solution as we'd originally thought
might work?
Axis2 needs a single model because the engine heavily depends on this
model.
(The Engine creates a runtime WSDL Message Component from an incoming SOAP
message and runs it through the correct runtime WSDL service component and
runtime WSDL operation component.) We parse the SOAP using StAX so single
parser issue is another goal. So in short both single model and single
parser are goals. But Single model does not necessarily mean a model that
caters both APIs. Think we are rather happy with a WSDL 2.0 based model and
convert a WSDL 1.1 model into Woden WSDL 2.0 API.
Thanks
Chathura
"Chathura Herath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/14/2005 12:05 AM
Please respond to
woden-dev
To
<[email protected]>
cc
Subject
Axis2 and wooden
Hi,
This is my idea of how the Axis2 and wooden integration. We already have a
Component model (WOM) in Axis2 which is WSDL 2.0 compliant and we are ready
to throw it away and get Axis2 to work on wooden. But the support for WSDL
1.1 is an absolute necessity. Currently what we do in Axis2 is that get the
wsdl4j to parse the WSDL (1.1) file and build a WOM out of it (Note: The
WOM
is a WSDL 2.0 compliant model and we do some work to make it happen even in
the absence of constructs like Message 2.0.). Think our concentration will
be to do a WSDL2.0 TO Wooden builder. If we can have a WSDL1.1 TO Wooden
builder too then I can strip away WOM and get Axis2 to work on wooden
directly. That would be best case for Axis2.
Lawrence, I ll have a look at what’s checked in to get an idea of how I can
be of help. I would like to know the view of the team to the WSDL1.1 TO
Wooden builder
Chathura
________________________________________
From: Lawrence Mandel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 11:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Fw: Copyright's for incoming projects
John,
Chathura has volunteered to contribute. (Thanks Chathura!) Can you suggest
some areas in which you can use help at this point?
Thanks,
Lawrence
"Chathura Herath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/13/2005 04:54 AM
Please respond to
woden-dev
To
<[email protected]>
cc
Subject
RE: Fw: Copyright's for incoming projects
Hi Sanjiva, all,
Had a look around after seeing the recent mails and had a look at the svn
location and found some implementation there. Didn't see any svn commit nor
discussions either. Is the commits get posted to [email protected]
???.
I have already gone through some of the work that is to be done. I didn't
know that there has been commits. I am very much willing put some time into
this and contribute.
+1 to discussions on this list.
Chathura
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 2:18 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Fw: Copyright's for incoming projects
>
> On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 01:33 -0400, Lawrence Mandel wrote:
> >
> > Hi Sanjiva,
> >
> > Development had already started on the WSDL 2.0 validating parser but
> > the parser was not yet well developed. The parser was donated and
> > development is now continuing at Apache with the Woden project.
>
> Where? Is there another list??
>
> > Woden is currently being developed using the public SVN repository. I
> > agree that it doesn't make sense to develop in a closed or private
> > setting and that is certainly not the intention of the few of us
> > working on Woden. If it seems that way it's probably because so far
> > John Kaputin has made the bulk of the code contribution.
>
> I'm confused .. is Woden not one and the same as the "WSDL 2.0
> validating parser" you referred to above?
>
> Are commit messages going somewhere else? If not IIRC I haven't received
> any commit messages.
>
> > I'd also like to see more discussion on this list and also agree that
> > input from interested groups (such as Axis, Eclipse, and the W3C) will
> > be beneficial at this early stage of development.
>
> I'd like to see *some* discussion on this list ;-). The only message in
> May for example AFAICT was about the Web site! I don't recall a single
> technical discussion ... did I just miss a bunch of mail?
>
> > Arthur Ryman is acting as the W3C WSDL 2.0 working group
> > representative and I am acting as the Eclipse WTP representative to
> > this project. I know John has been in touch with someone from Axis but
> > can you act as a representative for Axis and bring Axis related
> > concerns to the attention of this list? If not, is there someone else
> > you can recommend to fill this role?
>
> Chathura Herath, who's doing the WOM stuff in Axis2, was listed as a
> co-committer for Woden. However, AFAIK he hasn't had any contact with
> the Woden team either.
>
> I will also be around and will be happy to help build bridges as needed.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
