You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-user@ws.apache.org by Vijay Gautam <vi...@accesslease.com> on 2000/10/13 00:35:57 UTC
object to be passed???
I am pretty new to APACHE-SOAP.....................would like to clear some
confusion i am having.....
if we pass embedded objects via call, does the Apache-SOAP API actually
converts it to XML with SOAP and sends it to the server or do we actually
need to make an XML file from objects and send it to the SOAP API????
Thanks and Regards,
Vijay Sheel Gautam
Accesslease.com, Suite #105,
1355, Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA, USA
email - vijay@accesslease.com
phone number - 1 415 946 6337(office)
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by James McCauley <ja...@ebookers.com>.
Brian Hannan wrote:
> Just be aware that XMI is designed to be first and foremost a UML
> interchange language. Unless you are designing your objects in UML, you're
> going to find XMI to probably be more than what you need.
>
> More importantly, XMI like UML is for defining meta class information. So
> this means your XML docs do not have an object instance but describe what
> the class looks like. In XMI, the DTD does not describe the meta class,
> it's the meta meta class.
>
> And you still can't get away from base types. To marshal any object in any
> RPC, unless the caller and callee can marsal and unmarshal a raw sequence
> of bytes or binary data that is the object, you'll have to get them down to
> base types as well. You'll find the same deal with XMI.
>
> Hope this helps. Right now I'm just looking at SOAP's XML schema for types
> and trying to build serialization around that.
>
> James McCauley wrote:
>
> > This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
> > (http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
> > it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
> > SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
> > arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
> > this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
> > question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
> >
> > Hi guys:
> >
> > I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
> >
> > My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
> > can
> > _truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
> > 'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
> > code...
> >
> > Download it free at:
> >
> > http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -----
> > Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
> > Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
> > University of California, Irvine
> > http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
> >
> > ...if you manage to get this working let us know
> > james
Oh, thats what I was afraid of.Cheers for the explanation.
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by James McCauley <ja...@ebookers.com>.
Brian Hannan wrote:
> Just be aware that XMI is designed to be first and foremost a UML
> interchange language. Unless you are designing your objects in UML, you're
> going to find XMI to probably be more than what you need.
>
> More importantly, XMI like UML is for defining meta class information. So
> this means your XML docs do not have an object instance but describe what
> the class looks like. In XMI, the DTD does not describe the meta class,
> it's the meta meta class.
>
> And you still can't get away from base types. To marshal any object in any
> RPC, unless the caller and callee can marsal and unmarshal a raw sequence
> of bytes or binary data that is the object, you'll have to get them down to
> base types as well. You'll find the same deal with XMI.
>
> Hope this helps. Right now I'm just looking at SOAP's XML schema for types
> and trying to build serialization around that.
>
> James McCauley wrote:
>
> > This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
> > (http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
> > it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
> > SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
> > arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
> > this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
> > question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
> >
> > Hi guys:
> >
> > I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
> >
> > My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
> > can
> > _truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
> > 'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
> > code...
> >
> > Download it free at:
> >
> > http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -----
> > Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
> > Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
> > University of California, Irvine
> > http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
> >
> > ...if you manage to get this working let us know
> > james
Oh, thats what I was afraid of.Cheers for the explanation.
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by Brian Hannan <bh...@airflash.com>.
Just be aware that XMI is designed to be first and foremost a UML
interchange language. Unless you are designing your objects in UML, you're
going to find XMI to probably be more than what you need.
More importantly, XMI like UML is for defining meta class information. So
this means your XML docs do not have an object instance but describe what
the class looks like. In XMI, the DTD does not describe the meta class,
it's the meta meta class.
And you still can't get away from base types. To marshal any object in any
RPC, unless the caller and callee can marsal and unmarshal a raw sequence
of bytes or binary data that is the object, you'll have to get them down to
base types as well. You'll find the same deal with XMI.
Hope this helps. Right now I'm just looking at SOAP's XML schema for types
and trying to build serialization around that.
James McCauley wrote:
> This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
> (http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
> it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
> SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
> arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
> this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
> question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
>
> Hi guys:
>
> I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
>
> My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
> can
> _truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
> 'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
> code...
>
> Download it free at:
>
> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
>
> Thanks!
> -----
> Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
> Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
> University of California, Irvine
> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
>
> ...if you manage to get this working let us know
> james
--
Brian Hannan
Chief Admiral of Uncle Jam's Navy
"One nation under a groove, gettin' down just for the FUNK of it."
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by Brian Hannan <bh...@airflash.com>.
Just be aware that XMI is designed to be first and foremost a UML
interchange language. Unless you are designing your objects in UML, you're
going to find XMI to probably be more than what you need.
More importantly, XMI like UML is for defining meta class information. So
this means your XML docs do not have an object instance but describe what
the class looks like. In XMI, the DTD does not describe the meta class,
it's the meta meta class.
And you still can't get away from base types. To marshal any object in any
RPC, unless the caller and callee can marsal and unmarshal a raw sequence
of bytes or binary data that is the object, you'll have to get them down to
base types as well. You'll find the same deal with XMI.
Hope this helps. Right now I'm just looking at SOAP's XML schema for types
and trying to build serialization around that.
James McCauley wrote:
> This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
> (http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
> it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
> SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
> arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
> this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
> question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
>
> Hi guys:
>
> I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
>
> My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
> can
> _truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
> 'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
> code...
>
> Download it free at:
>
> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
>
> Thanks!
> -----
> Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
> Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
> University of California, Irvine
> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
>
> ...if you manage to get this working let us know
> james
--
Brian Hannan
Chief Admiral of Uncle Jam's Navy
"One nation under a groove, gettin' down just for the FUNK of it."
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by James McCauley <ja...@ebookers.com>.
This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
(http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
Hi guys:
I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
can
_truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
code...
Download it free at:
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
Thanks!
-----
Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
University of California, Irvine
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
...if you manage to get this working let us know
james
Re: object to be passed???
Posted by James McCauley <ja...@ebookers.com>.
This is causing me some confusion as well. The features page
(http://xml.apache.org/soap/features.html ) says that using XMI encoding
it is possible to marshall / unmarshall arbitary objects. It seems the
SOAP encoding is only able to cope with a few basic types ( vectors,
arrays etc. ). I'm having a look now at how to serialize any object with
this XMI encoding but haven't got too far. Check out the reply to my
question from Eric Dashofy on the same topic earlier:
Hi guys:
I realize that I sound like a broken record with a sales pitch, but...
My Hermit libraries have an Apache-SOAP compatible ObjectSerializer that
can
_truly_ serialize & deserialize arbitrary Java objects if you add one
'implements ...' interface to your class and three lines of boilerplate
code...
Download it free at:
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy/index-research.html
Thanks!
-----
Eric M. Dashofy <ed...@ics.uci.edu>
Graduate Student Researcher, Information & Computer Science
University of California, Irvine
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~edashofy
...if you manage to get this working let us know
james