axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Glen Daniels" <gdani...@macromedia.com>
Subject WSDD/code comments
Date Tue, 01 May 2001 12:54:51 GMT
Some quick comments/questions on the WSDD code:

1) Why are Handlers and Chains distinguished in the DeploymentRegistry?
Doesn't this kind of break the composite pattern?

2) Is a Provider going to be a special type of Handler (i.e. interface
Provider extends Handler)?  Do we envision Providers being the only thing
you can plug in as the "service handler" in a SOAPService, say?

3) Rather than namespaceURI/localPart, if typeMappings used QNames like
this:

 <typeMapping xmlns:addr="urn:xml-soap-address-demo"
              name="address"
              encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
              qName="addr:address"
              languageSpecificType="java:samples.addressbook.Address"
              serializer="java:org...."
              deserializer="java:org...." />

  ...we'd be able to re-use in-scope namespaces for types.  Also, it would
be nice if there was a way to set an encodingStyle at the service level.

4) Same comment re: namespace in the <operation> element.  Also, what is the
purpose of the alias attribute here?  What about something like this:

 <provider xmlns:ns1="my-namespace-uri">
  <operation id="op1" name="ns1:getQuote" />
  <operation name="ns1:giveMeThePrice" href="#op1" />
 </provider>

(what I'm trying to get at here is re-using pre-existing XML patterns rather
than inventing new ones)

5) I'm in the midst of revamping SOAPServiceHandler into
axis.handlers.soap.SOAPService, which will have the same qualities as
SimpleTargetedChain (it'll now implement the TargetedChain interface).  This
should clean the class up a bit, and that should be the default type for
services, I think.  Using SimpleTargetedChain is too abstract, since it
doesn't specify any SOAPyness.  I might also suggest NOT defaulting the type
attribute, since we know that XML Protocol is on the way, and that there's a
strong possibility that things will change for that.  If we default to a
SOAP service now, and then switch the default to an XMLP service in a year,
it might get a little weird to upgrade existing installations.

(gotta run - more later!)

--G



Mime
View raw message