Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-axis-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 37679 invoked by uid 500); 22 Oct 2001 12:45:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 37371 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 12:45:18 -0000 Importance: Normal Subject: --package or not --package (was: Re: AXIS chat log for 9 October, 2001) To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Russell Butek" Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 07:44:50 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D04NMS23/04/M/IBM(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 10/22/2001 08:44:51 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N (Tom, sorry I missed your comments on this, I should have responded a week ago.) Ravi is right about the two issues. While --package seems more usable than --NStoPkg or a config file, --package is NOT correct. If Wsdl2java encounters multiple namespaces, it MUST map them to multiple package names. We already have a sample - address book - that has 2 namespaces, one for the WSDL stuff and one for the schema types. And I also pointed out an example from the WSDL spec that places the individual WSDL elements into different packages. Even the whitemesa interop tests have multiple namespaces. I don't understand the concern over a config file. It would be OPTIONAL and only used in complex environments, so only folks that are already dealing with the nastiness of complexities would have to worry about it. I agree that we'd have to answer some questions - format (property file), location, etc - but once those questions are answered it's not difficult. I've written emitters that deal with property files, and Berin tells us that Cocoon uses the command line/config file technique for arguments and it's fairly standard. Let me repeat the suggested solution. 1. remove --package 2. add some sort of command line argument for the namespace-to-package mappings (--NStoPkg -N ... -N ) 3. look for a mapping properties file 4. 2 takes precedence over 3 Do we need to vote on this? Russell Butek butek@us.ibm.com Ravi Kumar on 10/20/2001 01:16:50 PM Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org cc: Subject: Re: AXIS chat log for 9 October, 2001 There are two issues here: usability and correctness. If two types with the same name are populated into two different namespaces, we just have to handle it. Similarly, when exporting a class with the same name from two pakages, they need to be distinguishable. As regards to usability, I don't have a strong preference between --p and --NStoPkg or just -NStoPkg. I agree there is going to be tooling around these anyway .... hmm, may be we should throw in a minimal UI! Rgds Ravi Sam Ruby wrote: > Tom Jordahl wrote: > > > > Are we keeping in mind the Use Case for Wsdl2java? I am writing an > > application that does many things, one of which is to use a web service. I > > get the WSDL for the service, run the tool on it, and incorporate that code > > in to my code base. I can use the web service via the stub, I include > > axis.jar in my classpath, then I go on with my coding. Do I really want to > > map namespace's here? Am I missing a use case that is going to be more > > common? > > My feeling is that if someone hands you a non-trivial WSDL for you to > implement (i.e., something a bit more that echo or bidbuy), then you will > likely need to do some custom mappings - in particular provide your own > serializers and deserializers. Ultimately, there will be a need for third > party wizards or other tooling to assist with this process. > > That does not meet that we should not continue to push back to keep the > simple case simple (i.e., config file free). > > - Sam Ruby