axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Irantha" <iran...@wso2.com>
Subject Re: Looking into open issue 3364
Date Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:13:50 GMT
Hi Glen & Deepal,

As I understood from the discussion we need to support following
(correct me if this is wrong),

Type               Schema                               Result if missing
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
primitive          minOc=1                                      exception
primitive          !( minOc=1)                                  exception
Object            minOc=0 && nillable=true              null
Object            !(minOc=0 && nillable=true)           exception


Making RPC MR schema aware shouldn't be that difficult.
What do you think?

Thanks,
Irantha





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Deepal jayasinghe" <deepalk@gmail.com>
To: <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: Looking into open issue 3364


> Hi Glen,
>>
>>> As I mentioned in the JIRA, I did a local fix and get  that working,
>>> however most of the java2wsdl and some runtime code generation tests
>>> failed. So I did not commit the changes. My changes only involve in
>>> SchemaGenerator, and it is very simple fix. Only thing is to make sure
>>> you get the test cases working. Currently for any input type it sets
>>> minoccurs to 0 , so you just need to change that to 1.
>>
>> So you're saying we shouldn't support optional parameters, and
>> therefore we should be throwing an exception for missing parameters? 
>> And we shouldn't be able to pass null values?  Hmm...
> Well I was referring to generate WSDL to cope with RPC MR. I agree with
> you, but to handle those we need to fix the RPC MR. So my suggestion was
> to get what working right, and then address the improvements later.
>>
>> I think we should be able to be as expressive and simple as possible
>> in making our schemas align with the Java structure - and supporting
>> missing wire parameters which will become null values for Object types
>> certainly seems reasonable toward that end.
> Agreed. But if you put minoccurs=0 , that's mean it is possible that
> parameter not appear in the request. Of course we handle nillable
> correctly. In my understanding nillable and minoccurs are two different
> things (please correct me if I am wrong)
>>
>> In other words, IMO we should support on the server side:
>>
>> Type        Result if missing    Schema
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> primitive    exception        minOc=1
> +1, but we need to burn schema aware passing logic into RPC MR.
>> Object        null            minOc=0
> Nope, here we need to add additional "nillable=true" attribute for
> complex types.
>>
>> Also, this way if the client wants to send a null there's a way to do
>> it (don't include the param).
>>
>> This doesn't seem that hard to do, and I think it makes for nicer REST
>> URLs and SOAP messages in some cases.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --Glen
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> http://blogs.deepal.org
>

Mime
View raw message