axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From R J Scheuerle Jr <>
Subject Re: [AXIS2] DOOM and SOAPEnvelope
Date Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:41:17 GMT

"Paul Fremantle" <> wrote on 08/02/2007 06:01:14 AM:

> I recently found some parts of DOOM that weren't implemented (I got
> TODO exceptions).
> I believe these were in implementations of SOAPEnvelope/SOAPBody. I
> also had a problem where DOOM couldn't cope with an empty Namespace.
> Anyway, my point is this. Surely we shouldn't have two implementations
> of the SOAP* interfaces - one for DOOM and one for LLOM? Won't the
> code be exactly the same in both cases?

The SOAP implementation objects extend the DOOM or LLOM objects.  Thus>
two implementation hierarchies are needed (one for DOOM and one for LLOM).

An alternative approach is to have a single SOAP implementation hierarchy
delegates to an OM tree.  Then you would have a single SOAP implementation.
However this has a different set of challenges.  The main challenge is that
you may have
two objects for each element (e.g. A lightweight SOAPEnvelope object that
delegates to an OMElement).

If you took this approach, I also suggest splitting out the SAAJ code and
using a similar approach.).
SAAJ objects extend (versus delegate) to LLOM objects.
Is there any benefit to moving the SAAJ model to Axiom.  The only downside
is that Axis2 would still need
to implement SOAPConnection...but the rest of the code is basically
modelling code.

> If not, I'm sure we could refactor so it is.
> Paul
> --
> Paul Fremantle
> Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2
> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
> blog:
> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform",
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Rich Scheuerle
IBM Web Services
Apache Axis2 (
512-838-5115  (IBM TL 678-5115)
View raw message