axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Doug Davis" <>
Subject Re: doLocal, jws, and http in general
Date Tue, 12 Jun 2001 14:20:16 GMT
What are the other options?  Knowing that this
thing known as a URL should be mapped to a file
on the filesystem seems to be clearly a transport
specific task.  Even knowing that something (the
servlet?) should look at the request URL at all
has to be a transport task.  Before jws we never
looked at the request URL at all - we didnt' need
to - we didn't care how we got into the servlet.
With jws we now care about it - where can it go
without introducing the notion of URL into the
rest of the product?
I would imagine that the same would
be true for any other transports as well.
(Where's that infamous 4th choice, as mr hag used
to ask for 8-)   sorry - inside joke)

Sam Ruby/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS on 06/12/2001 09:57:34 AM

Please respond to

Subject:  Re: doLocal, jws, and http in general

Doug Davis wrote:
> This jws stuff all depends on which piece of logic you're talking
> about.  Like Glen said there are two pieces, the piece that maps
> the URL to a file on the file system, and then there's a piece that
> actually processes the file.  If certain transports (or the doLocal
> option) are configured so that they by-pass the handlers that
> do the URL->file mapping then yes additional lines of code will
> be needed for those transports (the lines you pointed to).

I would have been happy if you indicated that this was a quick hack to get
something up and running, but you seem to be implying that this is

I personally do not believe that the HTTP transport should have knowledge
of what 'endsWith( ".jws")' means, or of any properies or constants which
begin with JWS.

If, however, we decide that it is the transports's responsibility to
resolve the file name (if any) that this URL might resolve to, then I am OK
with that.

- Sam Ruby

View raw message