axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanj...@opensource.lk>
Subject Re: [Axis2] SOAP streamning vs optimized OM (and DOM) [Re: [Axis2][FYI] ActiveSOAP
Date Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:22:03 GMT
"Jochen Wiedmann" <jochen.wiedmann@freenet.de> writes:
> 
> IMO this is simply the point that I am trying to argue in the OM 
> discussion: Noone rejects the ability to build an OM. Noone even rejects 
> to build it by default.

Unless things have changed radically since the F2F, the plan was
to build by default an OM for just the headers and not for the 
payload. The design of the OM is spsed to allow full, honest,
streaming if the "please cache into OM" flag is not turned on.

(My network connection is done so I haven't been able to join
today's chat :-( ..)

> The question is: DO we *have* to build it? Fact is, if you have a 
> streaming model, it is *very* easy to build the OM on top of it. The 
> converse isn't true. Fact also is, the streaming model is the only 
> actual reason for StAX: Anything else (for example, the so-called 
> providers) can very easily be done using SAX.

The only reason to build an OM even for headers is because of the
possibility of one handler accessing more headers than it declared
its into to handle. (We don't currently have a "declared intent" 
model for handlers but we could easily add that.) I'm personally
for the default to be no OM being built at all .. but that didn't
fly very well.

Sanjiva.

Mime
View raw message