I'm a bit lost here. If WSIF is wsdl oriented and java based :),
then isn't the mapping always from xml schema to java (and reverse) ?
Sorry for the question, but I only used AXIS, EJB and Java providers
yet.
/jog
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aleksander Slominski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 2:07 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [wsif] generic type mapping [Re: bug 16485
> [BeanDeserializer error when XML element starts with a
> capital letter]]
>
>
> Jacques-Olivier Goussard wrote:
>
> >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.
> >
> hi Jacques-Olivier,
>
> i think that we should keep in mind that WSIF can be used to
> invoke not
> only XML oriented services so any generic serializer should
> be carefully
> designed to work with EJB, Java and other WSIF providers. also it
> probably should fit into WSIF model that is WSDL driven so
> all mappings
> should be derived from information provided in WSDL file and
> be either
> provider specific (the way you propose) or provider
> independent (that is
> what i was thinking) or both ways can be supported too.
>
> thanks,
>
> alek
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
> --
> "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
>
>
>
