Hi John, Unfortunately my proposal rejected for GSOC, any way when I write my proposal I got lot of knowledge about Woden and WSDL related area and most important point is I found a starting point to contribute to Apache.
Any way I decide to work on Woden serialization project continuously, these days I'm having my end semester exams until end of this month, I'm plane to upload my initial work within the first two weeks of May. (Most probably part of WSDLWriter …..) Thank you very much for your comments & motivation! I will try to upload my initial works based on as JIRA issue WODEN-65) , much as possible to get your comments … Regards, sagara On 4/18/07, John Kaputin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Sagara, how is your GSoC proposal going? Any news yet? regards, John Kaputin John Kaputin/UK/IBM 02/04/2007 11:43 To [email protected] cc Subject Re: A serialization for Apache Woden Hi Sagara, we had heard from the WSO2 guys that we might get some help on Woden serialization via GSoC, so it is great that you are available and willing to take this on. Serialization been outstanding for quite a while now, but with limited resources and the focus on the WSDL 2.0 spec we just haven't had time to look at it yet. Lately, it's been mainly me and Graham Turrell working on Woden, but Lawrence Mandel, Arthur Ryman and Jeremy Hughes are also Woden developers and are active on the mailing list as are Keith Chapman and Eran Chinthaka, so if you need help or guidance just post to this list - we are here to help. You can use JIRA issue WODEN-65 [1] to discuss issues and upload your code contributions. I'm happy to review the code, run your test cases and commit the code to the repository. I read your proposal and it looks good. As you say in your proposal, WSDL4J's WSDLWriter, WSDLWriterImpl and DOM2Writer provide a good model to follow. I am likely to do some rework on the Woden extensions programming model for the next release (M8), so we'll see how that affects serialization of extensions. Please use the naming convention "WSDLWriter", not "WSDL2Writer". This will maintain consistency with the rest of Woden. For example, we Woden contains WSDLReader, not WSDL2Reader. We don't use the suffix "2" in the API or implementation class names to differentiate WSDL2 from WSDL 1.1. E.g: org.apache.woden.WSDLWriter org.apache.woden.impl.WSDLWriterXXXX Note, the Woden converter tool will eventually be included in the Woden processor so that Woden can read both WSDL 2.0 and WSDL 1.1 documents, but they will only be exposed as WSDL 2.0 (WSDL 1.1 will be converted to the WSDL2 model), so there will still be no need to differentiate WSDL "2" in the Woden API. For the implementation classes, can you look at the WSDLReader implementation as an example of how common behaviour between the DOM and OM/StAX implementations have been been refactored into BaseWSDLReader, using XMLElement as an abstraction of DOM Element and OMElement. See if there's similar opportunity to merge common serialization behaviour. [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WODEN-65 Welcome aboard and good luck, John Kaputin "Sagara Gunathunga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/03/2007 11:30:49: > I'm planning to do a Project for GSoC under the ASF (A serialization > for Apache Woden object model) ? basically I'm trying to achieve 2 things. > > (1) Develop WSDLWriter (Actually WSDL2Writer) > (2) Supports WSDLExtensions architecture > > Already I got some comments from Eran Chinthaka and I fell, I am not > properly wrote my proposal ??? > > This is the first time I involved to this kind of an open source > project. I selected this because I fell much confidence with this. > And I have already studied source codes of Woden & WSDL4J in to > some extend. > > Hear is the link for my original proposal ( http://www.pdn.ac. > lk/csup/student/woden.html). It is important to me, if some one can > read and can give comments about my proposal. Because I want to > continuously contribute to Woden project whether my proposal will > accept or rejected for GsoC. > > Tanks > > Sagara > Blog - http://ssagara.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
