Hi
That's the whole point of dynamic invocation...You do not
need a stub to invoke the operations. But I guess you have
a point here: patching AXIS is probably not enough, WSIF
should have a way to specify serializers, which could probably
be used for streaming in the case of AXIS/SOAP and in place
of the <format:typeMapping> for the EJB and java bindings.
Jacques-Olivier
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 1:16 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [wsif] generic type mapping [Re: bug 16485
> [BeanDeserializer error when XML element starts with a
> capital letter]]
>
>
>
> Hola ant, everyone:
>
> I'm a little confused here. Could you please give me a usage
> scenario for what you're talking about? Why are people
> trying to tie apparently unrelated JavaBeans to XML
> serializations? It seems like either the schema will be
> built from the Java class to begin with, or the Java class
> will be built from the schema to begin with... any other
> pattern a) seems odd, and b) requires some kind of metadata
> to map the XML to the Java (otherwise, what do you do when
> the bean has field "name" and the XML has field "moniker"?
> Case-changing won't help you there...). How do these classes
> get created?
>
> Trying to grok the situation,
> --Glen
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Anthony Elder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 12:20 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [wsif] generic type mapping [Re: bug 16485
> > [BeanDeserializer error when XML element starts with a
> > capital letter]]
> >
> >
> >
> > From the comments Glen added to the bugzilla record the only
> > way to do this
> > if the bean itself doesn't have the TypeDesc info is to have
> > another class
> > named as the bean class name appended with "_Helper". (Glen,
> > please leap in
> > here if there is another way to do this)
> >
> > As WSIF is designed to be dynamic and we don't know what
> > WSDL will be used
> > or what bean classes are available before hand, for each
> > operation we'd
> > have to parse the WSDL schema, find the associated beans,
> > check for setters
> > for each field, if we don't find one, check again with a name
> > starting with
> > a lowercase letter, and if that finds one create a TypeDesc
> > class for it.
> > Perhaps we could do that with BCEL.
> >
> > Even if there is a way to register the TypeDesc info with
> AXIS without
> > generating a class on the fly, this is a lot of work to be
> > doing for each
> > WSIF operation.
> >
> > Another option would be for WSIF to have a patched copy the AXIS
> > BeanSerializer code which has the fix to try with a lowercase
> > 1st letter.
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> > Anthony Elder
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Web Services Development
> > IBM UK Laboratories, Hursley Park
> > (+44) 01962 818320, x248320, MP208.
> >
> >
> > Aleksander Slominski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18/02/2003 16:12:01
> >
> > Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cc:
> > Subject: [wsif] generic type mapping [Re: bug 16485
> > [BeanDeserializer
> > error when XML element starts with a capital letter]]
> >
> >
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > why do you think that code generation is required?
> >
> > AFAIK there would be no code generation but just converting in AXIS
> > provider form WSIFTypeDesc (or something like that) into AXIS
> > TypeDesc?
> >
> > that would allow other WSIF providers to do do similar
> things: declare
> > mappings in provider specific way based on WSIFTypeDesc. we
> > already have
> > WSIFService.mapType()/WSIFDynamicTypeMap and we may just need
> > to take it
> > one step further and allow more fins grained mapping control?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > alek
> >
> > Owen D Burroughs wrote:
> >
> > >I don't think that WSIF should be generating code "on the
> > fly". This would
> > >be very slow.
> > >
> > >Owen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >|---------+---------------------------->
> > >| | Anthony |
> > >| | Elder/UK/IBM@IBMG|
> > >| | B |
> > >| | |
> > >| | 18/02/2003 12:04 |
> > >| | Please respond to|
> > >| | wsif-dev |
> > >| | |
> > >|---------+---------------------------->
> > > >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------------|
> >
> > > |
> > |
> > > | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > |
> > > | cc:
> > |
> > > | Subject: bug 16485
> > |
> > > |
> > |
> > > |
> > |
> > > >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------------|
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >A while ago a user reported a problem with WSIF using the AXIS bean
> > >serializer when the schema used names which start with a
> > capital letter:
> > >
> > >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-user&m=104203857924370&w=2.
> > >
> > >I raised an AXIS bugzilla about it:
> > >
> > >http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16485
> > >
> > >which has now been closed as working as designed. I guess
> > Glen is right in
> > >what he says about the reasons for closing this, but as the
> > original user
> > >pointed out, it seems wrong for WSIF to be dependent on the
> > AXIS specific
> > >TypeDesc info:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>I would have expected WSIF not to be AXIS dependant for
> the complex
> > >>type mapping, as it makes the client code dependant upon
> the chosen
> > >>binding. From the code - but I'm really new to WSIF so
> there may be
> > >>better ways - it seemed to me that the AXIS provider would have to
> > >>generate the TypeDesc at runtime (i.e., doing WSDL2Java job) and
> > >>use it to create the proper BeanDeserializers.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >I'm not sure how easy it would be for WSIF to generate the
> > TypeDesc on the
> > >fly. What does anyone else think about this?
> > >
> > > ...ant
> > >
> > >Anthony Elder
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Web Services Development
> > >IBM UK Laboratories, Hursley Park
> > >(+44) 01962 818320, x248320, MP208.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > "Mr. Pauli, we in the audience are all agreed that your
> > theory is crazy.
> > What divides us is whether it is crazy enough to be true."
> > Niels H. D. Bohr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
