axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "J. Matthew Pryor" <matthew_pr...@versata.com>
Subject RE: Using DII with complex types ??
Date Thu, 07 Feb 2002 02:58:15 GMT
Yep OK fair comment. My apologies for the lazy terminology (comes from a
pathetic lack of knowledge I am afraid ;-)

I was particularly interested in document literal binding since I was
wanting to be able to dynamically invoke .Net service based solely on the
WSDL

It probably (hopefully) will be the case the XML type definitions using
complex types would only be used in rpc encoded bindings when the intent was
to pass an actual "struct" object or whole object, not as a way to wrap up
single parameters.

My hope is that for document literal binding, why would DII ask for an
encoding when the "later" will be removed to marshal it to the receiver
anyway ?

My logic is that if the stub generator can work out that no complex type is
needed at generation time, can't DII work out that it is not needed at
runtime as well ?

I realize this could get difficult, but I am more interested for simple
cases that may be an interoperability issue.

If .Net generated WSDL will always "wrap" parameters up as complex types,
even if they contain single "built-in" types, then in the interest of
interoperability it would be nice to be able to handle at least that case.

Of course I am just speculating based on the small amount of .Net generated
WSDL I have read & tried to call with Axis/JAX-RCP DII

Thanks,
Matthew

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Butek [mailto:butek@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 5:41 AM
> To: axis-user@xml.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Using DII with complex types ??
>
>
> Be careful with this statement of removing layers.  That's not strictly
> true.  When the binding uses document literal we remove a layer
> (I think we
> do that because .NET does it).  When the binding uses rpc encoding we do
> not remove the layer.
>
> As long as you construct classes for complexTypes properly you  can use
> them in the DII model.  You have to do everything yourself in DII, that's
> the drawback to 'dynamic', it doesn't help you.  Or are you
> saying you wish
> the Call object had methods with which you could construct a complex
> parameter bit by bit?  That would be difficult.
>
> Russell Butek
> butek@us.ibm.com
>
>
> "J. Matthew Pryor" <matthew_pryor@versata.com> on 02/05/2002 08:10:52 PM
>
> Please respond to axis-user@xml.apache.org
>
> To:   <axis-user@xml.apache.org>
> cc:
> Subject:  RE: Using DII with complex types ??
>
>
>
> This is an interesting question
>
> If you look at how the stub emitter currently works (well the CVS
> version I
> have), it actually "removes" layers from complex types, so if you have
> operation that takes as a parameter a complex type with a single
> xsd:string
> element with minoccurs & maxoccurs = 1, the stub generates a method with a
> java.lang.String parameter
>
> Now this is very nice because it make the stub easy to use. It would be
> even
> nicer if the DII stuff could do this. i.e. remove the layers of complex
> type
> wrapping and just accept of Vector of concrete types to "marshal" into the
> operation
>
> However I guess the issue is that this does not conform literally to the
> WSDL. I personally think it would be nice to support both
>
> a) a literal mapping
> b) a easy to use mapping that just accepted the raw data and took care of
> the details
>
> Matthew
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Olivier Brand [mailto:obrand@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 10:01 PM
> > To: axis
> > Subject: Using DII with complex types ??
> >
> >
> > Just wondering if it makes sense to use the JAX-RPC DII feature when the
> > operation is dealing with complex types ?
> > I believe the DII feature is to avoid manual stub generation. But you
> > still need to deal with complex types if any.
> > What do you have to do on the client side (the caller) in order to
> > manipulate complex types ??
> >
> > Olivier
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message