axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Srinath Perera <hemap...@gmail.com>
Subject [Axis2]Conserns on method signature on InOutMEPClient invokeXX()
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 16:06:36 GMT
Hi All;

Got two comments on the Client API (I am afraid I too involve in
designing them, but got doubts)

At the MEPClient API, does is there a special reason to have the following two

1) Have the OperationDescription as a input in the invokeXX()?
I think this do not make sense at all, we have already given the
ServiceContext at the constructor and we can look up the operation, it
is sufficent for user to just give a QName. Sometime users are force
to create a operation to invoke

2) Have the MessageContext as input
Are we gain anything with this that we can not have with options, how
about the SOAPEnvelope? Becouse MessageContext is vague .. and users
do not decide from the API what properties should be st or not.

I am curious How many of you have EVER used the MEPClient API e.g.
InOutMEPCleint instead of Call. I have done it in few occasions, and
it was possible because I know what exactly going inside. Otherwise it
is not that easy to use that layer due to above method signatures. How
many of us developers use it?

Thanks
Srinath

p.s. Real reason for my Q is trouble I get while I implement the WSDL
based dynamic invoker. I get serious misgiving while trying to do it.
See below

Problem with Dynamic Invocation
========================
I think I should be creating Call and MessageSender Objects rather
than InOutMEPClient and InOnlyMEPCleint as the latter accept message
contexts and  AxisOperations, as a result not very user friendly .
right?

But if I choose the first I can not use the information available to me
via the WSDL (like AxisOperation) as Call and MessageSender assume
certain things (e.g. create a Dummy Operation by the name)

What do you think and recommend? I am not sure which way to go

Mime
View raw message