You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cxf.apache.org by Paul Wilton <Pa...@bbc.com> on 2009/07/06 17:25:04 UTC
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Sergey,
Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON where
a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response the
root element would remain) :
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
handle it because of lack of the root element.
You said :
"I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with a
better quality one if it were JAXB
driven as a number of users depend on it
being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing features
like the ability to
schema-validate, which should not be a
problem if it were JAXB-aware."
Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could be
addressed?
Thanks
Paul
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this
This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned subsidiaries of the BBC:
BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@progress.com>.
Hi Paul
I think I may want to ask Dan to initiate a 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT Hudson build. All the changes are local to JSONProvider so in meantime
you might want to copy the source from the trunk or 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT and register it as a custom provider, I'll be applying few minor
updates to it (proper exception reporting, etc) but it won't affect what it already does now...
cheers, Sergey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Wilton" <Pa...@bbc.com>
To: <us...@cxf.apache.org>
Cc: <se...@iona.com>
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 9:46 AM
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Sergey
Sounds awesome - thanks.
I have tried 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT using the bundle-jaxrs dependency, but the
JSONProvider doesn't seem to have the new methods in it.
I am using following dependency + repo (note: I have cleaned and pulled
the latest snapshot down)
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
<artifactId>cxf-bundle-jaxrs</artifactId>
<version>2.2.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
<repository>
<id>apache-snapshots</id>
<name>repository.apache.org snapshots repo</name>
<url>http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/</url>
</repository>
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 09 July 2009 18:09
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi
It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
and then one of 3 options:
1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
or, if namespace qualified
provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
// etc for all known classes
3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of
the
wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available
on
ObjectFactories, etc
2&3 can be combined.
Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for cases
when
namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
will be allocated by default if needed...
You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can
consume
the service response now, it would be helpful
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
> Cheers
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
> but if
> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
> given
> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
> JSONProvider.
>
> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
> 2.2.3
> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
> slightly
> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of
injecting
> a
> node name property.
>
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Yep -
>> that sounds like something that could work :
>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>> JSONProvider
>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
> JSON
>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>> expressed
>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
> use
>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>> JAXB-driven
>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
> if
>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released
Jettison
>> 1.1
>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we
feel
>> we're
>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>> Perhaps we
>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact,
I've
>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>
>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as
it
>> does
>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>
>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
>> "}"
>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
> easily...
>>
>> cheers, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>
>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>> where
>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>> the
>>> root element would remain) :
>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>
>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no
root
>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>
>>> You said :
>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider)
with
>> a
>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
> features
>>> like the ability to
>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>
>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
> be
>>> addressed?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>> personal
>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>> If
>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
>> not
>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
>> on it
>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>
>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>
>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>
>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358143.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358527.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24414226.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@progress.com>.
Hi Paul
thanks for verifying it. At the moment a SequenceInputStream is used, the original stream is not really copied again, which should
be quite efficient. I will probably end up using a custom XMLStreamReader on top of the one created by Jettison which would decorate
an unwrapped JSON sequence...
cheers, Sergey
From: "Paul Wilton" <Pa...@bbc.com>
To: <us...@cxf.apache.org>
Cc: <se...@iona.com>
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 10:31 AM
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Sergey
I have tested JSONProvider using the source from the cxf trunk using
setWrapperName -it works just fine :)
cheers
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 10 July 2009 10:01
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Paul
I think I may want to ask Dan to initiate a 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT Hudson build.
All
the changes are local to JSONProvider so in meantime
you might want to copy the source from the trunk or 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT and
register it as a custom provider, I'll be applying few minor
updates to it (proper exception reporting, etc) but it won't affect what
it
already does now...
cheers, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Sergey
> Sounds awesome - thanks.
> I have tried 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT using the bundle-jaxrs dependency, but the
> JSONProvider doesn't seem to have the new methods in it.
> I am using following dependency + repo (note: I have cleaned and
pulled
> the latest snapshot down)
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
> <artifactId>cxf-bundle-jaxrs</artifactId>
> <version>2.2.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
> </dependency>
>
> <repository>
> <id>apache-snapshots</id>
> <name>repository.apache.org snapshots repo</name>
> <url>http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/</url>
> </repository>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 09 July 2009 18:09
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi
>
> It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
>
> There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
> 'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
> JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
> provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
>
> and then one of 3 options:
>
> 1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
> or, if namespace qualified
> provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
> 2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
> map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
> // etc for all known classes
> 3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of
> the
> wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
> attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available
> on
> ObjectFactories, etc
>
> 2&3 can be combined.
> Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for
cases
> when
> namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
> will be allocated by default if needed...
>
> You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can
> consume
> the service response now, it would be helpful
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
>> Cheers
>> Paul
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
>> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
>> but if
>> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
>> given
>> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
>> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
>> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed
for
>> JSONProvider.
>>
>> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
>> 2.2.3
>> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
>> slightly
>> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of
> injecting
>> a
>> node name property.
>>
>> thanks, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep -
>>> that sounds like something that could work :
>>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>>> JSONProvider
>>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
>> JSON
>>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Paul
>>>
>>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>>> expressed
>>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
>> use
>>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>>> JAXB-driven
>>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't
know
>> if
>>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released
> Jettison
>>> 1.1
>>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we
> feel
>>> we're
>>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>>> Perhaps we
>>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact,
> I've
>>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>>
>>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as
> it
>>> does
>>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>>
>>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:"
&
>>> "}"
>>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
>> easily...
>>>
>>> cheers, Sergey
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>
>>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>>> where
>>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>>> the
>>>> root element would remain) :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>>
>>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no
> root
>>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>>
>>>> You said :
>>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider)
> with
>>> a
>>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
>> features
>>>> like the ability to
>>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>>
>>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
>> be
>>>> addressed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>>> personal
>>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
stated.
>>> If
>>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do
>>> not
>>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
reliance
>>> on it
>>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>>
>>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>>
>>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>>> 1p24358143.html
>>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358527.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24414226.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24423936.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Paul Wilton <Pa...@bbc.com>.
Hi Sergey
I have tested JSONProvider using the source from the cxf trunk using
setWrapperName -it works just fine :)
cheers
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 10 July 2009 10:01
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Paul
I think I may want to ask Dan to initiate a 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT Hudson build.
All
the changes are local to JSONProvider so in meantime
you might want to copy the source from the trunk or 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT and
register it as a custom provider, I'll be applying few minor
updates to it (proper exception reporting, etc) but it won't affect what
it
already does now...
cheers, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Sergey
> Sounds awesome - thanks.
> I have tried 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT using the bundle-jaxrs dependency, but the
> JSONProvider doesn't seem to have the new methods in it.
> I am using following dependency + repo (note: I have cleaned and
pulled
> the latest snapshot down)
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
> <artifactId>cxf-bundle-jaxrs</artifactId>
> <version>2.2.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
> </dependency>
>
> <repository>
> <id>apache-snapshots</id>
> <name>repository.apache.org snapshots repo</name>
> <url>http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/</url>
> </repository>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 09 July 2009 18:09
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi
>
> It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
>
> There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
> 'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
> JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
> provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
>
> and then one of 3 options:
>
> 1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
> or, if namespace qualified
> provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
> 2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
> map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
> // etc for all known classes
> 3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of
> the
> wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
> attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available
> on
> ObjectFactories, etc
>
> 2&3 can be combined.
> Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for
cases
> when
> namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
> will be allocated by default if needed...
>
> You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can
> consume
> the service response now, it would be helpful
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
>> Cheers
>> Paul
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
>> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
>> but if
>> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
>> given
>> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
>> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
>> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed
for
>> JSONProvider.
>>
>> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
>> 2.2.3
>> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
>> slightly
>> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of
> injecting
>> a
>> node name property.
>>
>> thanks, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep -
>>> that sounds like something that could work :
>>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>>> JSONProvider
>>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
>> JSON
>>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Paul
>>>
>>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>>> expressed
>>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
>> use
>>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>>> JAXB-driven
>>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't
know
>> if
>>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released
> Jettison
>>> 1.1
>>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we
> feel
>>> we're
>>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>>> Perhaps we
>>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact,
> I've
>>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>>
>>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as
> it
>>> does
>>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>>
>>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:"
&
>>> "}"
>>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
>> easily...
>>>
>>> cheers, Sergey
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>
>>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>>> where
>>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>>> the
>>>> root element would remain) :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>>
>>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no
> root
>>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>>
>>>> You said :
>>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider)
> with
>>> a
>>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
>> features
>>>> like the ability to
>>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>>
>>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
>> be
>>>> addressed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>>> personal
>>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
stated.
>>> If
>>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do
>>> not
>>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
reliance
>>> on it
>>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>>
>>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>>
>>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>>> 1p24358143.html
>>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358527.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24414226.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24423936.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <se...@iona.com>.
Hi Paul
I think I may want to ask Dan to initiate a 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT Hudson build. All
the changes are local to JSONProvider so in meantime
you might want to copy the source from the trunk or 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT and
register it as a custom provider, I'll be applying few minor
updates to it (proper exception reporting, etc) but it won't affect what it
already does now...
cheers, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Sergey
> Sounds awesome - thanks.
> I have tried 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT using the bundle-jaxrs dependency, but the
> JSONProvider doesn't seem to have the new methods in it.
> I am using following dependency + repo (note: I have cleaned and pulled
> the latest snapshot down)
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
> <artifactId>cxf-bundle-jaxrs</artifactId>
> <version>2.2.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
> </dependency>
>
> <repository>
> <id>apache-snapshots</id>
> <name>repository.apache.org snapshots repo</name>
> <url>http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/</url>
> </repository>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 09 July 2009 18:09
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi
>
> It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
>
> There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
> 'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
> JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
> provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
>
> and then one of 3 options:
>
> 1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
> or, if namespace qualified
> provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
> 2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
> map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
> // etc for all known classes
> 3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of
> the
> wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
> attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available
> on
> ObjectFactories, etc
>
> 2&3 can be combined.
> Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for cases
> when
> namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
> will be allocated by default if needed...
>
> You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can
> consume
> the service response now, it would be helpful
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
>> Cheers
>> Paul
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
>> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
>> but if
>> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
>> given
>> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
>> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
>> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
>> JSONProvider.
>>
>> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
>> 2.2.3
>> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
>> slightly
>> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of
> injecting
>> a
>> node name property.
>>
>> thanks, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep -
>>> that sounds like something that could work :
>>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>>> JSONProvider
>>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
>> JSON
>>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Paul
>>>
>>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>>> expressed
>>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
>> use
>>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>>> JAXB-driven
>>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
>> if
>>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released
> Jettison
>>> 1.1
>>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we
> feel
>>> we're
>>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>>> Perhaps we
>>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact,
> I've
>>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>>
>>>
>>
> http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>>
>>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as
> it
>>> does
>>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>>
>>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
>>> "}"
>>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
>> easily...
>>>
>>> cheers, Sergey
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>
>>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>>> where
>>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>>> the
>>>> root element would remain) :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>>
>>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no
> root
>>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>>
>>>> You said :
>>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider)
> with
>>> a
>>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
>> features
>>>> like the ability to
>>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>>
>>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
>> be
>>>> addressed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>>> personal
>>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>>> If
>>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
>>> not
>>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
>>> on it
>>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>>
>>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>>
>>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>>> Registered
>>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>>
>>
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>>> 1p24358143.html
>>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358527.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24414226.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp24357551p24423936.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Paul Wilton <Pa...@bbc.com>.
Hi Sergey
Sounds awesome - thanks.
I have tried 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT using the bundle-jaxrs dependency, but the
JSONProvider doesn't seem to have the new methods in it.
I am using following dependency + repo (note: I have cleaned and pulled
the latest snapshot down)
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
<artifactId>cxf-bundle-jaxrs</artifactId>
<version>2.2.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
<repository>
<id>apache-snapshots</id>
<name>repository.apache.org snapshots repo</name>
<url>http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/</url>
</repository>
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 09 July 2009 18:09
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi
It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
and then one of 3 options:
1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
or, if namespace qualified
provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
// etc for all known classes
3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of
the
wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available
on
ObjectFactories, etc
2&3 can be combined.
Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for cases
when
namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
will be allocated by default if needed...
You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can
consume
the service response now, it would be helpful
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
> Cheers
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
> but if
> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
> given
> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
> JSONProvider.
>
> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
> 2.2.3
> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
> slightly
> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of
injecting
> a
> node name property.
>
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Yep -
>> that sounds like something that could work :
>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>> JSONProvider
>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
> JSON
>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>> expressed
>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
> use
>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>> JAXB-driven
>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
> if
>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released
Jettison
>> 1.1
>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we
feel
>> we're
>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>> Perhaps we
>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact,
I've
>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>
>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as
it
>> does
>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>
>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
>> "}"
>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
> easily...
>>
>> cheers, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>
>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>> where
>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>> the
>>> root element would remain) :
>>>
>>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>
>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no
root
>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>
>>> You said :
>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider)
with
>> a
>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
> features
>>> like the ability to
>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>
>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
> be
>>> addressed?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>> personal
>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>> If
>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
>> not
>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
>> on it
>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>
>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>
>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>
>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358143.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358527.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24414226.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <se...@iona.com>.
Hi
It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a
'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
and then one of 3 options:
1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
or, if namespace qualified
provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
// etc for all known classes
3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of the
wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available on
ObjectFactories, etc
2&3 can be combined.
Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for cases when
namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
will be allocated by default if needed...
You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can consume
the service response now, it would be helpful
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
> Cheers
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
> property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
> but if
> it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
> given
> that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
> instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
> property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
> JSONProvider.
>
> So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
> 2.2.3
> release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
> slightly
> modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of injecting
> a
> node name property.
>
> thanks, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Yep -
>> that sounds like something that could work :
>> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
>> JSONProvider
>> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
>> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
>> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
> JSON
>> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
>> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
>> To: users@cxf.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>>
>>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
>> expressed
>> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
> use
>> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
>> JAXB-driven
>> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
> if
>> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison
>> 1.1
>> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel
>> we're
>> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
>> Perhaps we
>> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
>> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>>
>>
> http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
>> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>>
>> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it
>> does
>> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>>
>> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
>> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
>> "}"
>> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
> easily...
>>
>> cheers, Sergey
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>
>>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
>> where
>>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
>> the
>>> root element would remain) :
>>>
>>>
>>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>>
>>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
>>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>>
>>> You said :
>>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with
>> a
>>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
> features
>>> like the ability to
>>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>>
>>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
> be
>>> addressed?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
>> personal
>>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>> If
>>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
>> not
>>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
>> on it
>>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>>
>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>>
>>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>>
>>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
>> Registered
>>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
>> 1p24358143.html
>> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358527.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp24357551p24414226.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@progress.com>.
Hi
It should be fixed now on the trunk/2.2.3-snapshot
There's a number of ways one can deal with it. In all cases a 'supportUnwrapped' property has to be set on the json provider :
JSONProvider provider = new JSONProvider();
provider.setSupportUnwrapped(true);
and then one of 3 options:
1. provider.setWrapperName("tags");
or, if namespace qualified
provider.setWrapperName("ns1.tags");
2. Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>();
map.put(Tags.class.getName(), "tags")
// etc for all known classes
3. finally, one can let the provider itself to figure out the name of the wrapper, it will check XMLRootElement first, and then will
attempt to do some more advanced checks in case this info is available on ObjectFactories, etc
2&3 can be combined.
Also, it is not a requirement now to register a namespace map for cases when namespace prefixed are needed to be serialized, they
will be allocated by default if needed...
You might want to try the latest provider source and see if it can consume the service response now, it would be helpful
thanks, Sergey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Wilton" <Pa...@bbc.com>
To: <us...@cxf.apache.org>
Cc: <se...@iona.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:19 AM
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
Cheers
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi,
Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
but if
it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
given
that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
JSONProvider.
So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
2.2.3
release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
slightly
modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of injecting
a
node name property.
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Yep -
> that sounds like something that could work :
> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
> JSONProvider
> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
JSON
> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
> expressed
> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
use
> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
> JAXB-driven
> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
if
> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison
> 1.1
> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel
> we're
> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
> Perhaps we
> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>
> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it
> does
> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>
> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
> "}"
> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
easily...
>
> cheers, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sergey,
>>
>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
> where
>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
> the
>> root element would remain) :
>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>
>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>
>> You said :
>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with
> a
>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
features
>> like the ability to
>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>
>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
be
>> addressed?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal
>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If
>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
> not
>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
> on it
>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>
>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>
>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358143.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24358527.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Paul Wilton <Pa...@bbc.com>.
That would be awesome if you could get it into the 2.2.3 release
Cheers
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 06 July 2009 17:18
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi,
Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again,
but if
it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically
given
that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
JSONProvider.
So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the
2.2.3
release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by
slightly
modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of injecting
a
node name property.
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Yep -
> that sounds like something that could work :
> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
> JSONProvider
> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated
JSON
> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
> expressed
> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to
use
> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
> JAXB-driven
> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know
if
> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison
> 1.1
> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel
> we're
> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
> Perhaps we
> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>
>
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>
> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it
> does
> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>
> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
> "}"
> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite
easily...
>
> cheers, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sergey,
>>
>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
> where
>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
> the
>> root element would remain) :
>>
>>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>
>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>
>> You said :
>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with
> a
>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing
features
>> like the ability to
>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>
>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could
be
>> addressed?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal
>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If
>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
> not
>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
> on it
>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>
>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>
>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358143.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24358527.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <se...@iona.com>.
Hi,
Yeah, if it's only a single root element which is dealt with and this
property is set then it would be easy for JSONProvider to wrap again, but if
it is not set then it can try to deduce the node name automatically given
that in its readFrom() method it has an access to the parent bean
instance... Actually, I haven't thought about injecting the node name
property but for simple cases it will make it easy and fast indeed for
JSONProvider.
So if it sounds like it should work then I will do it in time for the 2.2.3
release. In meantime, you might want to create a custom provider by slightly
modifying the existing one (yet again :-), using your idea of injecting a
node name property.
thanks, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Yep -
> that sounds like something that could work :
> just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
> JSONProvider
> for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
> that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
> unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated JSON
> into the bean (specified by the node name)
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
> To: users@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
>
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
> expressed
> some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to use
> JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
> JAXB-driven
> serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know if
> it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison
> 1.1
> and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel
> we're
> kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
> Perhaps we
> can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
> talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
>
> http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
> vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
>
> It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it
> does
> not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
>
> Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
> decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
> "}"
> sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite easily...
>
> cheers, Sergey
>
>
> Paul Wilton wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sergey,
>>
>> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
> where
>> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
> the
>> root element would remain) :
>>
>>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
>> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>>
>> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
>> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
>> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>>
>> You said :
>> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with
> a
>> better quality one if it were JAXB
>> driven as a number of users depend on it
>> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing features
>> like the ability to
>> schema-validate, which should not be a
>> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>>
>> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could be
>> addressed?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal
>> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If
>> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
> not
>> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
> on it
>> and notify the sender immediately.
>>
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
>> communication will signify your consent to this
>>
>> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
>> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>>
>> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
> Registered
>> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
> 1p24358143.html
> Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp24357551p24358527.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Paul Wilton <Pa...@bbc.com>.
Yep -
that sounds like something that could work :
just to be clear, you are suggesting simply adding a setter on
JSONProvider
for example setWrappedNodeElement(String nodeName)
that would decorate the InputStream with the nodeName so the JAXB
unmarshalling would go ahead as normal, and unmarshal the decorated JSON
into the bean (specified by the node name)
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
Sent: 06 July 2009 16:57
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Paul
Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony
expressed
some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to use
JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the
JAXB-driven
serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know if
it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison
1.1
and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel
we're
kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
Perhaps we
can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-con
vention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it
does
not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" &
"}"
sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite easily...
cheers, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON
where
> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response
the
> root element would remain) :
>
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>
> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>
> You said :
> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with
a
> better quality one if it were JAXB
> driven as a number of users depend on it
> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing features
> like the ability to
> schema-validate, which should not be a
> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>
> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could be
> addressed?
>
> Thanks
> Paul
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal
> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If
> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
not
> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it
> and notify the sender immediately.
>
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
> communication will signify your consent to this
>
> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>
> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England,
Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England,
Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408,
Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp2435755
1p24358143.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <se...@iona.com>.
Hi Paul
Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony expressed
some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the idea was to use
JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the JAXB-driven
serialization. People are often referring to Jackson but I don't know if
it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison 1.1
and fixed some blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel we're
kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now. Perhaps we
can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've
talked to him today about what appears to be a very similar issue :
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-convention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it does
not know what parent object a given JSON sequence belongs to.
Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would
decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with "{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" & "}"
sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite easily...
cheers, Sergey
Paul Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON where
> a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response the
> root element would remain) :
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
> 8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
>
> I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
> element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
> handle it because of lack of the root element.
>
> You said :
> "I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with a
> better quality one if it were JAXB
> driven as a number of users depend on it
> being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing features
> like the ability to
> schema-validate, which should not be a
> problem if it were JAXB-aware."
>
> Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could be
> addressed?
>
> Thanks
> Paul
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If
> you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not
> use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it
> and notify the sender immediately.
>
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
> communication will signify your consent to this
>
> This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned
> subsidiaries of the BBC:
>
> BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England, Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
> BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England, Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
> BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408, Registered
> Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JSON-in-CXF---root-element-dropped-tp24357551p24358143.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@progress.com>.
Hi Paul
Yes, I remember we were talking with Tony about it. I think Tony expressed some interest in enhancing the CXF JSON provider but the
idea was to use JSON annotations so that users could choose not to depend on the JAXB-driven serialization. People are often
referring to Jackson but I don't know if it's capable of handling JAXB beans fully. Dejan has released Jettison 1.1 and fixed some
blockers so, as far as JSON & JAXB is concerned we feel we're kind of ok with Jettison being the default JAXB provider for now.
Perhaps we can see some more Jettison micro releases going forward. In fact, I've talked to him today about what appears to be a
very similar issue :
http://www.nabble.com/Supprot-for-wrapped-unwrapped-styles-in-Mapped-convention-for-JSON-td24319534.html
It's something that a JSON library probably can't fix on its own as it does not know what parent object a given JSON sequence
belongs to.
Does the idea of replacing an InputStream with a new one which would decorate {the unwrapped sequence} with
"{jaxb-name-of-parent-bean:" & "}" sound reasonable ? This can be done in the JSONProvider quite easily...
cheers, Sergey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Wilton" <Pa...@bbc.com>
To: <us...@cxf.apache.org>
Cc: <se...@iona.com>
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: JSON in CXF - root element dropped
Hi Sergey,
Recall this conversation (back in Feb 2009), about consuming JSON where
a list of objects has had the root element dropped (in XML response the
root element would remain) :
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/200902.mbox/%3C019d01c9
8b9b$7a4ae450$0c02050a@emea.progress.com%3E
I am also in position of trying to consume a Web service with no root
element in the JSON response, and the standard JSON provider can't
handle it because of lack of the root element.
You said :
"I'd happy to consider replacing the existing one (JSONProvider) with a
better quality one if it were JAXB
driven as a number of users depend on it
being JAXB aware, such that we can also preserve the existing features
like the ability to
schema-validate, which should not be a
problem if it were JAXB-aware."
Did this get taken any further, and if not, is something that could be
addressed?
Thanks
Paul
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless
specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this
This e-mail has been sent by one of the following wholly-owned subsidiaries of the BBC:
BBC Worldwide Limited, Registration Number: 1420028 England, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
BBC World News Limited, Registration Number: 04514407 England, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ
BBC World Distribution Limited, Registration Number: 04514408, Registered Address: BBC Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TQ