You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> on 2007/03/20 18:11:58 UTC
[axis2] A couple of Addressing questions
Hi folks:
Why do we have a separate AddressingValidationHandler? Wouldn't it make
more sense simply to do any addressing-specific validation right in the
AddressingInHandler or the AddressingBasedDispatcher? Is it possible to
simplify this?
Also, rather than having separate Handlers for the different versions of
addressing, wouldn't it make more sense to have just one
AddressingInHandler and then let that do version-specific work with its
own utility classes? A separate handler seems like overkill.
Thanks,
--Glen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [axis2] A couple of Addressing questions
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
David Illsley wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure there are people who would object to including
> "WS-Addressing" specific logic in the "Addressing"Dispatcher so there
> should probably be:
> 5. No WS-Addressing spec type logic in the AddressingDispatcher
Glen you may recall this topic .. we decided to bring addressing concepts
to the core but not a dependency on WS-Addressing in particular. So the
"addressing dispatcher" is dispatching on these abstract properties and
not on WS-Addressing directly. The WS-Addressing module reads those
headers and populates the properties.
I don't see any need to change that model at this time.
Sanjiva.
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Director; Open Source Initiative; http://www.opensource.org/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [axis2] A couple of Addressing questions
Posted by David Illsley <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Glen,
It's all up for grabs as far as I'm concerned.. though I have the
following requirements in mind...
1. Must be possible to deploy support for only one of the supported
addressing versions
2. Must be possible to disable the validation
3. Avoid churn for its own sake
4. Some of the validation has to happen after operation dispatch
I'm pretty sure there are people who would object to including
"WS-Addressing" specific logic in the "Addressing"Dispatcher so there
should probably be:
5. No WS-Addressing spec type logic in the AddressingDispatcher
Brian is right that I'm mid refactor of the dispatchers (and hope to
complete that this week) but I don't think that's relevant.
I'm not aware of any performance numbers suggesting it's important to
minimise the chain length... so I'm not sure if it's worth the churn.
Do you have anything in particular you are considering?
David
On 20/03/07, Brian De Pradine <PR...@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Glen,
>
> See my response below.
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian DePradine
> Web Services Development
> IBM Hursley
> External +44 (0) 1962 816319 Internal 246319
>
> If you can't find the time to do it right the first time, where will you
> find the time to do it again?
>
>
> Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote on 20/03/2007 17:11:58:
>
> > Hi folks:
> >
> > Why do we have a separate AddressingValidationHandler? Wouldn't it make
> > more sense simply to do any addressing-specific validation right in the
> > AddressingInHandler or the AddressingBasedDispatcher? Is it possible to
> > simplify this?
>
> I believe that historically the AddressingBasedDispatcher is not meant to be
> tied to strongly to ws-addressing. Hence it is not a part of the Addressing
> module :-(. This has meant the need to have a separate AddressingValidation
> handler. However, I believe that David is planning some refactoring of the
> dispatchers which may mean that we can revisit this.
>
> > Also, rather than having separate Handlers for the different versions of
> > addressing, wouldn't it make more sense to have just one
> > AddressingInHandler and then let that do version-specific work with its
> > own utility classes? A separate handler seems like overkill.
>
> I had considered refactoring the inbound processing into one handler, but
> elected not to do it in the end. At the time, I was taking the approach of
> "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Now, I have no objections to doing it if
> folks feel that this is the best way to go.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Glen
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> >
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [axis2] A couple of Addressing questions
Posted by Brian De Pradine <PR...@uk.ibm.com>.
Hello Glen,
See my response below.
Cheers
Brian DePradine
Web Services Development
IBM Hursley
External +44 (0) 1962 816319 Internal 246319
If you can't find the time to do it right the first time, where will you
find the time to do it again?
Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote on 20/03/2007 17:11:58:
> Hi folks:
>
> Why do we have a separate AddressingValidationHandler? Wouldn't it make
> more sense simply to do any addressing-specific validation right in the
> AddressingInHandler or the AddressingBasedDispatcher? Is it possible to
> simplify this?
I believe that historically the AddressingBasedDispatcher is not meant to
be tied to strongly to ws-addressing. Hence it is not a part of the
Addressing module :-(. This has meant the need to have a separate
AddressingValidation handler. However, I believe that David is planning
some refactoring of the dispatchers which may mean that we can revisit
this.
> Also, rather than having separate Handlers for the different versions of
> addressing, wouldn't it make more sense to have just one
> AddressingInHandler and then let that do version-specific work with its
> own utility classes? A separate handler seems like overkill.
I had considered refactoring the inbound processing into one handler, but
elected not to do it in the end. At the time, I was taking the approach of
"if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Now, I have no objections to doing it
if folks feel that this is the best way to go.
>
> Thanks,
> --Glen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU