cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Liu, Jervis" <>
Subject REST support in 2.1 [WAS RE: 2.1 thoughts......]
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2007 08:22:46 GMT
Hi I would like to see more REST support in 2.1. Following are items we may want to consider:

1. JSR311 support: IMO this is something we definitely want to go with. Not only because JSR311
enables you do REST in a standard way, but also because JSR311 API does enforce you to design
your REST system in a more resource-oriented sense, hopefully this will partially resolve
a long debating topic in the REST community: how to design a real resource-oriented REST system
instead of a service-oriented system.

[1]. JCP home page of JSR311:  <>
[2]. JSR311 draft spec:  <>
[3]. Jersey, an implementation of JSR311:  <>

2. WSDL 2.0 HTTP Binding:  WSDL2.0 HTTP binding itself is not about REST, but it does provide
you a decent way to do POX (plain-old-XML) over HTTP, which enables you to do REST. This is
something we want to support as well. However, support WSDL2.0 is a huge effort, I am not
sure whether or not CXF community is ready to go this direction, especially considering the
fact that there aren't many users are actually using WSDL2.0 yet, nor does many web service
framework vendors support WSDL2.0. So my question is, do we want to do WSDL2.0 now?

To take the advantage of WSDL 2.0 HTTP binding, you have to upgrade all your WSDLs to 2.0
first. This sounds like a big limitation to me. I wonder if there is any alternatives, for
example, is it possible to develop a WSDL2.0 style HTTP binding extension for WSDL1.1? We
can view this as an upgrading of our current HTTP binding support. The different though, is
we can now map URI/HTTP verb combinations to java operations in WSDL binding part without
using Java REST Annotations in our POJOs or SEI.

[4]. WSDL2.0 HTTP binding:  <>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Diephouse []
> Sent: 2007?8?8? 1:27
> To:;
> Subject: Re: 2.1 thoughts......
> On 8/7/07, Daniel Kulp <> wrote:

> > 2) Data bindings - XmlBeans and JIBX have been on the list
> for a while
> > and I'm sure more XFire folks could find CXF more useful if
> we got those
> > working.    There are two parts: runtime and tooling.
> The runtime support is relatively trivial to port from XFire.
> The part that
> concerns me more is the tooling as I'm not familiar with the
> tooling APIs at
> all :-)
> >
> > 4) Rest stuff - all the buzzword compatible stuff.   :-)
> JSR 311 support would be nice, but quite a bit of work.

> 5) WS-* specs - do we have time to tackle any more of these at this
> > point?   Which ones should we prioritize?
> The big ones that I see are: WS-SecureConversation, WS-Trust and
> WS-SecurityPolicy. They're a bit of work though. I've started
> some work
> locally on these, but haven't gotten that for - I'm more
> stuck in the joys
> of getting JAXB and WS-SecurityPolicy to play well with our existing
> generated classes for WS-Policy.
> >
> >
> > I hate to ask for more ideas as that alone is a TON of
> work, but at this
> > point, let's get the ideas flowing.   :-)
> >
> >
> As I've hinted at before I think JAX-WS support should be our feature
> whereby we determine when we release. I.e. once we pass the
> TCK, lets do a
> release. If other features aren't done, we can knock off
> future releases
> quickly as those features are completed. We might even make
> it out of the
> incubator by then, so it'd be much faster :-) If we keep to
> the frequent
> release schedule, this should help us get out bug fixes
> faster and generate
> more project publicity as well.
> - Dan
> --
> Dan Diephouse
> Envoi Solutions
> |

IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
Registered Number: 171387
Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message