axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rodrigo Ruiz" <>
Subject Re: Java Object vs XML (Webservice)
Date Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:36:44 GMT
AFAIK, an attachment is only a chunk of bytes that is sent with your SOAP
message, but separated of the XML. This has the following advantages:

 - The attachment can be sent in binary form. No base64 encoding is needed,
so it is more efficient
 - The attachment is not inside the XML Envelope. This means less memory
used for creating the DOM tree in your C# client.

A DOM tree structure created from Java is not binary-compatible with C#
types. I mean that what you send over the net will necessarily be a String
representation of your XML data. You cannot avoid the conversion steps,
unless you use the same (or data compatible) language at both sides, which
is not your case.

You commented to have memory problems when receiving the response. This is
probably a consequence of your XML data being included into the SOAP
Envelope. Your client is probably trying to create a huge DOM tree. If this
is what is happening, attachments would be a good solution.

I do not use .NET clients, but I would investigate the "add-in" for DIME
support that Steve commented.

Rodrigo Ruiz

----- Original Message -----
From: "dumdum 420" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2003 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Java Object vs XML (Webservice)

> Well now what is the suggestion ... do I do attachment of my XML file and
> send it over the wire.
> If attachment which seems to me a good workable solution since I wont have
> to convert the .xml to a String object do I have to use SAAJ or which api
> and is the webservice going to be RPC based of I have to change the
> infrastructure all togther.
> Since I have never tried attachments before ,suggestion will really help.
> BP
> From: Steve Loughran <>
> Reply-To:
> To:
> Subject: Re: Java Object vs XML (Webservice)
> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 18:20:17 -0700
> Andrew Vardeman wrote:
> >because originally .NET didn't do attachments (client is a C# app) and I
> >haven't been keeping up.  Plus it was such a breakthrough to switch to
> >that I dunno if I'm up to learning yet another big chunk of Axis and
> >And while I'm writing both ends, deployment is such a pain (we waited
> >literally months for USDA to sign off on our installer) that now that our
> >users have .NET Framework 1.0, I dunno if we'll require them to upgrade
> >anytime soon.
> >
> >Mostly I felt obliged to in some way counteract the size change from
> >message to RPC, and zip + base64 gets sizes down well below what they
> >  Users were satisfied with download times before the change, but I
> >want them to take a hit to make my life easier.
> >
> .NET 1.1 doesnt do attachments either. you need the web services
> WSE stuff that is an add for either 1.0 or 1.1, which only does DIME (that
> axis handles)
> I dont see DIME lasting long term -now Don and others have this SwA1.1
> proposal (which I'm not over fond of), that lets them do stuff like sign
> binaries and things by pretending the attachments are base-64 things
> the XML.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.

View raw message