axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Sosnoski <>
Subject Re: [axis2] simple data binder
Date Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:29:13 GMT
Copying this to jibx-user, where we really should continue the 
discussion if you'd like to go further.

Dan Diephouse wrote:

> Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>> Dan Diephouse wrote:
>>> Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> There are other problems lurking in the wings from the standard 
>>>> schemas approach, too. Schema versioning is not well handled by any 
>>>> of the existing frameworks that I'm aware of, though JAXB 2.0 is 
>>>> moving in this direction. Right now the schema-centric frameworks 
>>>> require you to generate a new set of classes for each version of 
>>>> the schema you want to support. I don't think that's a practical 
>>>> solution, given the trend toward industry-wide schemas being 
>>>> updated every year or two. In a way this becomes a variation of 
>>>> start-from-Java, even if the Java you're starting from was 
>>>> generated from version 1.0 of the schema and you just want to work 
>>>> with version 1.1.
>>> I totally agree on the schema-> is very similar to the start from 
>>> java case. In each case you're still using a DTO pattern. What do 
>>> you see as alternatives to this approach?
>> The only alternative I know of is some form of mapped binding, where 
>> you use a binding definition to establish the relationships between 
>> your Java classes and XML. In the case of JiBX you can use multiple 
>> binding definitions with the same Java classes, so you're able to 
>> reuse your existing classes for different schema versions. That 
>> doesn't mean the classes don't have to change at all - you'd still 
>> need to add fields or new classes for new components from the schema 
>> - but you should be able to continue using the modified classes with 
>> different versions of the schema, selecting at runtime which binding 
>> to use for a particular input document.
> I knew JiBX had some of that capability. This may be a bit off topic, 
> but take this example: at first I'm receiving an xsd:double 
> representing a price, then I create a complex type which holds both 
> the amount and the currency units. Can JiBX take my xsd:double, create 
> a new price class with the default currency unit instead of just 
> passing me a double?

I can think of at least three simple ways of handling this using JiBX. 
Here's your original case:

  <price>12.99</price>   <->   private float m_price;

  Binding: <value name="price" field="m_price"/>

Here's the expanded version:

  <price units="USD">12.99</price>  <->  private CurrencyAmount m_price;

  public class CurrencyAmount {
    private String m_units;
    private float m_amount;
  Binding: <structure name="price" field="m_price">
                 <value name="units" style="attribute" field="m_units"/>
                 <value style="text" field="m_amount"/>

You could (1) set the default currency unit directly in the 
CurrencyAmount constructor, then just use normal JiBX binding features 
for everything. This would change your binding for the old-style 
documents to (as the clearest alternative):
  Binding: <structure field="m_price">
                 <value name="price" field="m_amount"/>

(2) you could use a factory method for the first case which just sets 
the default currency. This would be along the lines of:

  public class CurrencyAmount {
    public static CurrencyAmount newDefaultInstance() {
      CurrencyAmount inst = new CurrencyAmount();
      inst.m_units = "USD";
      return inst;
  Binding: <structure field="m_price" 
                 <value name="price" field="m_amount"/>

(3) you could just use the new binding for old documents as well, making 
the units attribute optional but defaulting to your old assumed value:
  Binding: <structure name="price" field="m_price">
                 <value name="units" style="attribute" field="m_units" 
usage="optional" default="USD"/>
                 <value style="text" field="m_amount"/>

> TIBCO did a cool thing which allowed you to map arbitrary classes to 
> arbitrary schema elements that I saw here (watch the screencast, ~5 
> minutes in):
> I don't know if others are, but I'd be interested in putting together 
> some sort of object/schema relationship designer that allowed you to 
> specify these relationships easily.

Doesn't play for me, but sounds like the type of thing I'd love to have 
work with JiBX. Want to join the JiBX project?

  - Dennis

View raw message