Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <64510FFDEBCAD511B8CB00065B055DE3093658@galaxy.natsys.fr>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric_Chabanois?= <CChabanois@cognicase.fr>
To: "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Re : Lightweight Skeletons
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:25:58 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Thanks,=20

I understand better now !

I still have questions concerning this point :
- if implementation class was compiled with -g, we know the names of =
the
output parameters, don't we ?
So skeletton should not be necessary=20

- if implementation class was not compiled with -g, getParametersNames =
is
used to get the names of the output parameters.
But the client (written in Delphi, MS.NET ...) has been created using =
the
wsdl, so it may be waiting for inout# parameters as the wsdl does not =
have
correct parameter names (because implementation class not compiled with =
-g
...)

So I think that if skeleton is present, getParameterNames should be =
used to
create the wsdl parameter names.

C=E9dric


> The getParameterNames(...) method is used by the AXIS runtime=20
> so that it
> can get the names of the output parameters to pass back.  This
> functionality used to be embedded in the skeleton methods.
>=20
> You are pointing out that the getParameterNames(...) method=20
> could also be
> used by Java2WSDL to get the parameter names for the wsdl file.
> You are correct, but I have not added this code yet.
>=20
> Rich Scheuerle
> XML & Web Services Development
> 512-838-5115  (IBM TL 678-5115)
>=20
>=20
>                                                              =20
>                                                                    =20
>                       C=E9dric Chabanois                       =20
>                                                                    =20
>                       <CChabanois@cogni        To:      =20
> axis-dev@xml.apache.org                                      =20
>           =20
>                       case.fr>                 cc:           =20
>                                                                    =20
>                                                Subject:  Re :=20
> Lightweight Skeletons                                              =20
>                       01/14/2002 09:36                       =20
>                                                                    =20
>                       AM                                     =20
>                                                                    =20
>                       Please respond to                      =20
>                                                                    =20
>                       axis-dev                               =20
>                                                                    =20
>                                                              =20
>                                                                    =20
>                                                              =20
>                                                                    =20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I think this is good news but I don't know if I have well=20
> understood the
> consequences.
>=20
> Say I have a web service (2 classes : the interface and the impl)
>=20
> 1) If I compile it with -g, parameter names are available so=20
> the skeleton
> is
> not necessary. Am I right ?
> The ?wsdl will have correct parameters (not in0, inout0 ...)
>=20
> 2) If I don't compile it with -g, parameter names are not available.
> Skeleton can be useful in this case because I can implement
> getParameterName
> and init functions that will tell the parameter names.
>=20
> Personnaly, I have made a skeleton (and added it in the wsdd=20
> file) but I
> still don't have correct parameter names in the generated=20
> wsdl (?wsdl).
>=20
> Why ?
>=20
>=20
> C=E9dric
>=20
>=20
> >Changed WSDL2Java and the runtime (RPCProvider,=20
> JavaUtils.convert) to use
> "lightweight" skeletons.
> >The skeletons now have the same method signatures as the=20
> impl, stub, and
> portType.
> >The skeletons delegate directly to the impl, the runtime=20
> automatically
> builds the proper Holder objects as necessary.
> >The only purpose for the skeletons is to provide a new method
> getParameterName(opName, i) which is used by RPCProvider to=20
> associate names
> with the output values.
> >So if this is not necessary for your service, no skeleton is=20
> needed. This
> is a big step towards the complete removal of skeletons.
> >For example, if the server has wsdl or other meta data, the runtime
> *could*
> automatically use the meta data to get the element names for=20
> the output
> values.
> >For the time being, these new lightweight skeletons will be used.
> >I also added a -S <true_or_false> option to WSDL2Java to=20
> indicate whether
> to deploy the skeleton (true) or the impl (false). >The default is
> currently
> true. Enjoy, Rich Scheuerle XML & Web Services Development=20
> 512-838-5115
> (IBM
> TL 678-5115)
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20