axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mike Oliver" <ol...@appsaspeers.com>
Subject RE: Document style web services
Date Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:20:53 GMT
I have to chime in on the side of Axis.  While I too went the route of
first using .NET to build some web services and generate a WSDL that was
because I needed to have two web services that supported the same
interface/methods, on so we can implement behind in .NET as well as we
can implement behind in Java. Java<>.NET, Java<>Java, .NET<>Java,
.NET<>.NET.

If someone were thinking they would start with WSDL and try to write
that first and generate from that....no wonder they are frustrated.
Start from Java and generate the WSDL from that and turn around and
generate the whole end to end with the WSDL...that works great!  KISS is
also a good recommendation, as it almost always is, even outside the
Axis world, eh?

Michael Oliver
AppsAsPeers LLC
7391 S. Bullrider Ave.
Tucson, AZ 85747
Phone:(520)574-1150
Fax:(520)844-1036


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Sosnoski [mailto:dms@sosnoski.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 1:52 AM
To: axis-user@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Document style web services

I'd personally disagree with this assessment of Axis as "not ready for 
prime time", but I can understand the frustrations. There's definitely a

steep learning curve involved in using Axis, and I agree that the 
developers need to focus more on improving usability and performance, as

well as bug fixes and documentation. As Martin said, nightly builds can 
also be traumatic. I've run into a number of problems trying to use the 
nightlys, and have basically dropped back to just working with the GA 
release 1.0 as a result.

On the good side, I haven't seen any problems with Axis 1.0 stability 
once you have a service deployed. It also provides enormous flexibility 
and extensibility, and in my experience developers can quickly get past 
the initial learning curve with some mentoring. I suppose the choice of 
Axis vs. GLUE or other commerical alternatives really depends on how 
much you intend to do with the software (if it's just a small project, 
the Axis learning curve may be costly) and how important it is to you to

have the source available.

  - Dennis

Dennis M. Sosnoski
Enterprise Java, XML, and Web Services Support
http://www.sosnoski.com

Martin Gee wrote:

>Hi Martin,
>
>I'm catching the tail end of this thread (sorry if this is a repeat). I
>find Axis valuable and the news thread has good information, but have
>made the same conclusion that AXIS is not ready for prime time. Maybe
>consider a production ready WS product http://www.themindelectric.com/
>Has free version too.
>
>Cheers,
>Martin
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Martin Jericho [mailto:martin.j@jabmail.com] 
>Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 5:02 PM
>To: axis-user@xml.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Document style web services
>
>Hi Tom
>
>I spent about a week playing around with axis to see why it wasn't
>working
>for me, and simplifying test cases to find out the causes.  I did post
a
>couple of bug reports on bugzilla, but no-one has even commented on
them
>yet.  I really did want to stick with axis, but in the end I had to
make
>a
>decision which was expedient for my project, which was to generate the
>WSDL
>using .NET.  I can't afford to spend the time investigating and writing
>bug
>reports for axis when there is another solution which works perfectly
>for
>me.
>
>I didn't report any of the other bugs primarily because they were too
>numerous, and it takes a significant amount of time to write up a bug
>report
>that is truly useful to the developer.  They were also quite
>fundamental, so
>would be easily detected by anyone else creating even the simplest of
>services.  This also makes me think they may have already been
addressed
>in
>the nightly builds.
>
>Nightly builds bring up a whole new area of gripes.  Firstly, it always
>turns out to be a major pain, involving a fair amount of guesswork, to
>upgrade to even a release version of axis.  This is because our project
>uses
>jakarta projects such as torque (which btw we are now quite desperate
to
>abandon), and velocity, and each expects different versions of the
>commons
>libraries, xerces and log4j.  The problem is that none of the jakarta
>jar
>libraries contain any version information whatsoever, so it is always
>guesswork to figure out which one is using the latest version, and very
>often they are not even backwards-compatible.  Axis itself is no better
>in
>this regard.  The jar file is always called axis.jar, with no version
>suffix, and the manifest file never includes a version number either.
I
>am
>not willing to use a nightly version of axis in production, and only
use
>beta versions of tools when there is no alternative.  What would be
>great is
>if there were a CVS branch created after 1.0, which included only bug
>fixes
>that are then released in "service packs".  I know this means more work
>for
>you guys, but in the real world you can't expect companies to use
>nightly
>builds unless they are heavily involved in the product's development
>like
>Macromedia is.
>
>Even writing a response like this takes up valuable development time
>(which
>I can afford at the moment because the server just kicked the bucket!).
>I
>don't apologise for not taking more time to contribute to axis, it's
>just a
>reality.
>
>Martin
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>
>To: <axis-user@xml.apache.org>
>Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 5:53 AM
>Subject: RE: Document style web services
>
>
>  
>
>>Martin,
>>
>>Can you please try Java2WSDL with the latest nightly build and report
>>    
>>
>any
>bugs you find in Bugzilla?
>  
>
>>We want this to work!  I hope you will find that the latest source
>>    
>>
>fixes
>most (all?) of the major problems.
>  
>
>>Thanks
>>--
>>Tom Jordahl
>>Macromedia
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Martin Jericho [mailto:martin.j@jabmail.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 5:32 PM
>>To: axis-user@xml.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Document style web services
>>
>>
>>Dennis,
>>
>>My experience is that Java2WSDL in Axis 1.0 has too many bugs to
>>    
>>
>generate
>  
>
>>document/literal style WSDL, but if you can generate it by some other
>>    
>>
>means,
>  
>
>>the WSDL2Java and bean marshalling seem to work fine.
>>
>>The reason you can't have multireferencing in document style calls is
>>because the document is validated against the schema.  If you define
>>    
>>
>the
>  
>
>>schema to allow IDs and REFs on every element, you can implement the
>>multirefs yourself, but this would make your schema virtually
>>    
>>
>unreadable,
>  
>
>>very complicated, and probably less robust.
>>
>>Martin Jericho
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Dennis Sosnoski" <dms@sosnoski.com>
>>To: <axis-user@xml.apache.org>
>>Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 7:03 AM
>>Subject: Re: Document style web services
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi Anne,
>>>
>>>Does Axis support automatic marshalling of document-style messages?
>>>      
>>>
>I
>  
>
>>>was under the impression it does not, which was why I suggested a
>>>DataBindingProvider might be useful to add this support. I agree
>>>      
>>>
>that
>  
>
>>>document-style is a better approach for the future, though I'd
>>>      
>>>
>hardly
>  
>
>>>call it a "predominant consensus" at this point. AFAIK document
>>>      
>>>
>style
>  
>
>>>interfaces are not as widely supported as RPC style, though, and I'm
>>>surprised to see your statement that most SOAP implementations
>>>      
>>>
>support
>  
>
>>>automatic marshalling for document style. Can you give me any
>>>      
>>>
>figures
>  
>
>>>for this?
>>>
>>>As for "no problem building automatic serializers" I have to
>>>      
>>>
>disagree. A
>  
>
>>>Schema definition does not, in general, provide enough information
>>>      
>>>
>to
>  
>
>>>directly map to Java data structures. If you use an approach where
>>>      
>>>
>the
>  
>
>>>data structures are either pre-generated from the Schema or
>>>      
>>>
>constrained
>  
>
>>>to obey a predefined mapping to and from the Schema you can get
>>>      
>>>
>around
>  
>
>>>this, but that's hardly automatic.
>>>
>>>I'm also puzzled by your statement that it's difficult handle
>>>multi-referencing object structures using document style. Is there a
>>>reason this can't be handled with ID/IDREF or key/keyref links?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>  - Dennis
>>>
>>>Dennis M. Sosnoski
>>>Enterprise Java, XML, and Web Services Support
>>>http://www.sosnoski.com
>>>
>>>Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Dennis,
>>>>
>>>>This is a pretty antiquated view of document style. Document style
>>>>        
>>>>
>is
>no
>  
>
>>>>longer used just for XML messaging. Most SOAP implementations
>>>>        
>>>>
>support
>  
>
>>>>automatic marshalling of both RPC-style and document-style
>>>>        
>>>>
>messages. As
>  
>
>>long
>>    
>>
>>>>as you have a WSDL description of the message structure, there's no
>>>>        
>>>>
>>problem
>>    
>>
>>>>building automatic serializers.
>>>>
>>>>The predominant consensus in the industry at this point is to use
>>>>document-style by default. Document style is much easier to
>>>>        
>>>>
>validate,
>  
>
>>>>transform, and manipulate. The primary reason to consider using
>>>>        
>>>>
>>rpc/encoded
>>    
>>
>>>>is if you need to send multi-referencing object structures. SOAP
>>>>        
>>>>
>encoding
>  
>
>>>>does a really nice job marshalling these structures. It's much
>>>>        
>>>>
>harded
>to
>  
>
>>>>represent them using literal XML Schema. But if you're not using
>>>>        
>>>>
>>multi-refs,
>>    
>>
>>>>it's a better practice to use document-style.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Anne
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Dennis Sosnoski [mailto:dms@sosnoski.com]
>>>>>Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 1:25 PM
>>>>>To: axis-user@xml.apache.org
>>>>>Subject: Re: Document style web services
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Matt,
>>>>>
>>>>>The whole point of document style is that your application gets
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>passed
>  
>
>>>>>the XML message payload as XML document fragments. See the
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>"message"
>  
>
>>>>>sample for an example of this. With a document style interface
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>your
>  
>
>>>>>class would look like:
>>>>>
>>>>>public class SomeXMLService {
>>>>>   public Element[] someXMLMethod(Element[] elems) {
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>   }
>>>>>}
>>>>>
>>>>>If you want to convert the XML into objects you need to do it
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>yourself,
>  
>
>>>>>perhaps using a framework such as Castor (http://www.castor.org).
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>I
>know
>  
>
>>>>>there's been some integration of Castor with Axis, though I think
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>this
>  
>
>>>>>was for custom serialization with RPC style.
>>>>>
>>>>>This brings up an interesting point, though. Why not have a Java
>>>>>DataBindingProvider as a replacement for the MsgProvider? This
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>should
>  
>
>>>>>allow easy use of document style while converting seamlessly
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>between
>XML
>  
>
>>>>>and objects without the application needing any special code. I'm
>>>>>looking into some data binding code currently, perhaps I'll see if
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>I
>can
>  
>
>>>>>work in this direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>
>>>>>Dennis M. Sosnoski
>>>>>Enterprise Java, XML, and Web Services Support
>>>>>http://www.sosnoski.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>
>
>  
>




Mime
View raw message