You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by ant elder <an...@gmail.com> on 2006/08/22 16:12:40 UTC
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples, I'm not
sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely to use
different databinding technologies on the same interface are you, and would
a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this for every
operation?
...ant
On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding extension
> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example. Please
> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
>
> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
> <operation name="getCreditReport">
> <input>
> <part index="0">
> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> http://customer}Customer"/>
> </part>
> </input>
> <output>
> <part index="0">
> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
> </part>
> </output>
> </operation>
> </tuscany:databinding>
> </interface.java>
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
>
>
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
I believe Celtix uses WSDL extensions for this i.e. annotations added
to the WSDL or possibly the underlying XMLSchema to indicate the
databinding to use. This is one reason caching WSDL definitions
became problematic as doing this creates different WSDL instances for
the same definition (with everything the same except the annotations).
This means we end up with a sliding scale:
* definition in SCDL, overrides
* definition in IDL (wsdl or java annotation), overrides
* definition by introspection of implementation
--
Jeremy
On Aug 25, 2006, at 2:44 AM, ant elder wrote:
> What I'm trying to see is the minimum needed to get assemblies
> going with
> different data bindings. One difference with using WSDL portTypes
> is that
> you can't use introspection or annotations so all the config needs
> to be
> done in the SCDL. I'm also wondering about the config for the
> source and
> target ends of the wires which is why the example i asked about
> earlier had
> a service wired to a component wired to a reference. Could you use
> that
> example and show what is the minimum necessary to get it working
> with the
> new data binding framework?
>
> ...ant
>
> On 8/25/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't see much difference to define DataTypes for WSDL portTypes
>> than
>> java
>> interfaces.
>>
>> If we look at the WSDL structure, we can define default DataType
>> for a
>> portType, an operation or a part.
>>
>> portType
>> operation
>> input: message
>> part
>> output: message
>> part
>> fault: message
>> part
>>
>> Usually, the part is typed by XSD. So it makes sense to have the
>> DataType
>> such as SDO, JAXB, and XmlBeans.
>>
>> An example may look like (for illustration only):
>>
>> <interface.wsdl ...>
>> ...
>> <tuscany:databinding
>> xmlns:tuscany="http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT"
>> dataType="sdo">
>> <!-- default to sdo for the portType -->
>> <operation name="getCreditReport" dataType="sdo"> <!--
>> default to
>> sdo for the operation -->
>> <!-- more fine control -->
>> <input>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo"
>> xmlType="{http://customer}Customer"/>
>> </part>
>> </input>
>> <output>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo"
>> xmlType="{http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> </part>
>> </output>
>> </operation>
>> </tuscany:databinding>
>> </interface.wsdl>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
>> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 1:39 AM
>> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
>> return
>> value
>>
>>
>> > What about when you're using interface.wsdl and things like
>> JavaScript?
>> > Take
>> > the following composite example, could you show what the
>> additional SCDL
>> > extension would be needed to get that to work with SDO and E4X?
>> >
>> > <composite ...>
>> >
>> > <service name="MyHelloWorldWebService" ...>
>> > <interface.wsdl.../>
>> > <binding.ws.../>
>> > <reference>HelloWorldComponent</reference>
>> > </service>
>> >
>> > <component name="HelloWorldComponent">
>> > <js:implementation.js script="HelloWorld.js"/>
>> > <references>
>> > <reference
>> name="helloWorldService">HelloWorldService</reference>
>> > </references>
>> > </component>
>> >
>> > <reference name="HelloWorldService">
>> > <interface.wsdl..."/>
>> > <binding.ws.../>
>> > </reference>
>> >
>> > </composite>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > ...ant
>> >
>> > On 8/23/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I think we have several use cases here:
>> >>
>> >> Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2
>> binding
>> >>
>> >> <composite ...>
>> >> <reference name="creditReport">
>> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> >> </reference>
>> >> ...
>> >> </composite>
>> >>
>> >> Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either
>> >> decorated
>> >> by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example,
>> the
>> >> Customer
>> >> can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the
>> DataType
>> be
>> >> specified at parameter/return value level for a given
>> operation. I'm
>> not
>> >> sure at which level where the default databinding should be set,
>> >> interface,
>> >> or composite?
>> >>
>> >> Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService
>> binding
>> >> uses
>> >> AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany
>> runtime
>> the
>> >> DataTypes it can support for references and services.
>> >>
>> >> Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the
>> invocation
>> to
>> >> a
>> >> POJO component
>> >>
>> >> <composite ...>
>> >> <service name="creditReportService">
>> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> >> <reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
>> >> </service>
>> >> <component name="CreditReportComponent">
>> >> <implementation.java
>> class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
>> >> ...
>> >> </composite>
>> >>
>> >> In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now
>> ready to
>> >> invoke
>> >> the target POJO component.
>> >>
>> >> Source DataType will be AXIOM.
>> >>
>> >> Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component
>> implementation
>> >> which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the
>> >> parameters.
>> >> The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or
>> >> introspection.
>> >>
>> >> Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same
>> composite
>> >>
>> >> Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the
>> >> application.
>> >> With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of
>> compatible
>> >> interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
>> >> "component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by
>> interface
>> >> CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by
>> CreditReportService2.
>> >> We
>> >> assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB,
>> same for
>> >> CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
>> >>
>> >> public interface CreditReportService1 {
>> >> public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> public interface CreditReportService2 {
>> >> public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB
>> customer);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Raymond
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
>> >> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for
>> parameters and
>> >> return
>> >> value
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete
>> examples,
>> I'm
>> >> not
>> >> > sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not
>> likely
>> to
>> >> > use
>> >> > different databinding technologies on the same interface are
>> you, and
>> >> > would
>> >> > a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all
>> this for
>> >> > every
>> >> > operation?
>> >> >
>> >> > ...ant
>> >> >
>> >> > On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding
>> >> extension
>> >> >> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an
>> example.
>> >> >> Please
>> >> >> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
>> >> >> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
>> >> >> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
>> >> >> <operation name="getCreditReport">
>> >> >> <input>
>> >> >> <part index="0">
>> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> >> http://customer}Customer"/>
>> >> >> </part>
>> >> >> </input>
>> >> >> <output>
>> >> >> <part index="0">
>> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> >> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> >> >> </part>
>> >> >> </output>
>> >> >> </operation>
>> >> >> </tuscany:databinding>
>> >> >> </interface.java>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Any opinions?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Raymond
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
When we use WSDL as an IDL in a java runtime, we probably have assumed some
data mapping rules because WSDL usually uses XML schema to define the data
types. To provide/consume data in java for a WSDL operation, we have to use
an XML info model such as DOM, AXIOM, SDO, and JAXB.
The SCA spec defines some rules for the java<-->WSDL mapping as quoted
below:
"1.3.4.4 Mapping of Java Interfaces to & from WSDL Interfaces
A Wire can connect between interfaces defined by different languages ie.
Java interfaces and
WSDL portTypes/WSDL interfaces in either direction, as long as the
operations defined by the
two interface types are equivalent. They are equivalent if the operation(s),
parameter(s), return
value(s) and faults/exceptions map to each other.
SCA maps Java interfaces to and from WSDL interfaces using the mapping
defined by the JAXWS
specification [4], with the following differences:
. Complex parameters and return values in WSDL operations may be mapped
as SDOs, using the mapping defined in the SDO 2.0 specification [2]
. Holder classes are not supported"
Based on this, I think we should at least support JAXB and SDO databindings
for the WSDL. It's not very clear in the spec which databinding is the
default. Maybe we can introspect the value to figure out which one is in
use.
For the granularity, it seems to me that we use the same databinding for
the whole interface in most cases. But we can support operation and
parameter levels if required. I guess we need to modify the
ServiceContract/Operation model to capture the default databinding at its
own level.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 2:44 AM
Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return
value
> What I'm trying to see is the minimum needed to get assemblies going with
> different data bindings. One difference with using WSDL portTypes is that
> you can't use introspection or annotations so all the config needs to be
> done in the SCDL. I'm also wondering about the config for the source and
> target ends of the wires which is why the example i asked about earlier
> had
> a service wired to a component wired to a reference. Could you use that
> example and show what is the minimum necessary to get it working with the
> new data binding framework?
>
> ...ant
>
> On 8/25/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't see much difference to define DataTypes for WSDL portTypes than
>> java
>> interfaces.
>>
>> If we look at the WSDL structure, we can define default DataType for a
>> portType, an operation or a part.
>>
>> portType
>> operation
>> input: message
>> part
>> output: message
>> part
>> fault: message
>> part
>>
>> Usually, the part is typed by XSD. So it makes sense to have the DataType
>> such as SDO, JAXB, and XmlBeans.
>>
>> An example may look like (for illustration only):
>>
>> <interface.wsdl ...>
>> ...
>> <tuscany:databinding
>> xmlns:tuscany="http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT"
>> dataType="sdo">
>> <!-- default to sdo for the portType -->
>> <operation name="getCreditReport" dataType="sdo"> <!-- default to
>> sdo for the operation -->
>> <!-- more fine control -->
>> <input>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo"
>> xmlType="{http://customer}Customer"/>
>> </part>
>> </input>
>> <output>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo"
>> xmlType="{http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> </part>
>> </output>
>> </operation>
>> </tuscany:databinding>
>> </interface.wsdl>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
>> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 1:39 AM
>> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
>> return
>> value
>>
>>
>> > What about when you're using interface.wsdl and things like JavaScript?
>> > Take
>> > the following composite example, could you show what the additional
>> > SCDL
>> > extension would be needed to get that to work with SDO and E4X?
>> >
>> > <composite ...>
>> >
>> > <service name="MyHelloWorldWebService" ...>
>> > <interface.wsdl.../>
>> > <binding.ws.../>
>> > <reference>HelloWorldComponent</reference>
>> > </service>
>> >
>> > <component name="HelloWorldComponent">
>> > <js:implementation.js script="HelloWorld.js"/>
>> > <references>
>> > <reference
>> name="helloWorldService">HelloWorldService</reference>
>> > </references>
>> > </component>
>> >
>> > <reference name="HelloWorldService">
>> > <interface.wsdl..."/>
>> > <binding.ws.../>
>> > </reference>
>> >
>> > </composite>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > ...ant
>> >
>> > On 8/23/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I think we have several use cases here:
>> >>
>> >> Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2
>> >> binding
>> >>
>> >> <composite ...>
>> >> <reference name="creditReport">
>> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> >> </reference>
>> >> ...
>> >> </composite>
>> >>
>> >> Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either
>> >> decorated
>> >> by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example, the
>> >> Customer
>> >> can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the DataType
>> be
>> >> specified at parameter/return value level for a given operation. I'm
>> not
>> >> sure at which level where the default databinding should be set,
>> >> interface,
>> >> or composite?
>> >>
>> >> Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService binding
>> >> uses
>> >> AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany runtime
>> the
>> >> DataTypes it can support for references and services.
>> >>
>> >> Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the invocation
>> to
>> >> a
>> >> POJO component
>> >>
>> >> <composite ...>
>> >> <service name="creditReportService">
>> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> >> <reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
>> >> </service>
>> >> <component name="CreditReportComponent">
>> >> <implementation.java class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
>> >> ...
>> >> </composite>
>> >>
>> >> In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now ready to
>> >> invoke
>> >> the target POJO component.
>> >>
>> >> Source DataType will be AXIOM.
>> >>
>> >> Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component
>> >> implementation
>> >> which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the
>> >> parameters.
>> >> The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or
>> >> introspection.
>> >>
>> >> Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same composite
>> >>
>> >> Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the
>> >> application.
>> >> With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of compatible
>> >> interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
>> >> "component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by interface
>> >> CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by
>> >> CreditReportService2.
>> >> We
>> >> assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB, same for
>> >> CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
>> >>
>> >> public interface CreditReportService1 {
>> >> public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> public interface CreditReportService2 {
>> >> public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB customer);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Raymond
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
>> >> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
>> >> return
>> >> value
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples,
>> I'm
>> >> not
>> >> > sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely
>> to
>> >> > use
>> >> > different databinding technologies on the same interface are you,
>> >> > and
>> >> > would
>> >> > a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this
>> >> > for
>> >> > every
>> >> > operation?
>> >> >
>> >> > ...ant
>> >> >
>> >> > On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding
>> >> extension
>> >> >> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example.
>> >> >> Please
>> >> >> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
>> >> >> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
>> >> >> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
>> >> >> <operation name="getCreditReport">
>> >> >> <input>
>> >> >> <part index="0">
>> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> >> http://customer}Customer"/>
>> >> >> </part>
>> >> >> </input>
>> >> >> <output>
>> >> >> <part index="0">
>> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> >> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> >> >> </part>
>> >> >> </output>
>> >> >> </operation>
>> >> >> </tuscany:databinding>
>> >> >> </interface.java>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Any opinions?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Raymond
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
What I'm trying to see is the minimum needed to get assemblies going with
different data bindings. One difference with using WSDL portTypes is that
you can't use introspection or annotations so all the config needs to be
done in the SCDL. I'm also wondering about the config for the source and
target ends of the wires which is why the example i asked about earlier had
a service wired to a component wired to a reference. Could you use that
example and show what is the minimum necessary to get it working with the
new data binding framework?
...ant
On 8/25/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't see much difference to define DataTypes for WSDL portTypes than
> java
> interfaces.
>
> If we look at the WSDL structure, we can define default DataType for a
> portType, an operation or a part.
>
> portType
> operation
> input: message
> part
> output: message
> part
> fault: message
> part
>
> Usually, the part is typed by XSD. So it makes sense to have the DataType
> such as SDO, JAXB, and XmlBeans.
>
> An example may look like (for illustration only):
>
> <interface.wsdl ...>
> ...
> <tuscany:databinding
> xmlns:tuscany="http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT"
> dataType="sdo">
> <!-- default to sdo for the portType -->
> <operation name="getCreditReport" dataType="sdo"> <!-- default to
> sdo for the operation -->
> <!-- more fine control -->
> <input>
> <part index="0">
> <dataType name="sdo"
> xmlType="{http://customer}Customer"/>
> </part>
> </input>
> <output>
> <part index="0">
> <dataType name="sdo"
> xmlType="{http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
> </part>
> </output>
> </operation>
> </tuscany:databinding>
> </interface.wsdl>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 1:39 AM
> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
> return
> value
>
>
> > What about when you're using interface.wsdl and things like JavaScript?
> > Take
> > the following composite example, could you show what the additional SCDL
> > extension would be needed to get that to work with SDO and E4X?
> >
> > <composite ...>
> >
> > <service name="MyHelloWorldWebService" ...>
> > <interface.wsdl.../>
> > <binding.ws.../>
> > <reference>HelloWorldComponent</reference>
> > </service>
> >
> > <component name="HelloWorldComponent">
> > <js:implementation.js script="HelloWorld.js"/>
> > <references>
> > <reference
> name="helloWorldService">HelloWorldService</reference>
> > </references>
> > </component>
> >
> > <reference name="HelloWorldService">
> > <interface.wsdl..."/>
> > <binding.ws.../>
> > </reference>
> >
> > </composite>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> > On 8/23/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I think we have several use cases here:
> >>
> >> Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2 binding
> >>
> >> <composite ...>
> >> <reference name="creditReport">
> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
> >> </reference>
> >> ...
> >> </composite>
> >>
> >> Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either
> >> decorated
> >> by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example, the
> >> Customer
> >> can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the DataType
> be
> >> specified at parameter/return value level for a given operation. I'm
> not
> >> sure at which level where the default databinding should be set,
> >> interface,
> >> or composite?
> >>
> >> Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService binding
> >> uses
> >> AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany runtime
> the
> >> DataTypes it can support for references and services.
> >>
> >> Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the invocation
> to
> >> a
> >> POJO component
> >>
> >> <composite ...>
> >> <service name="creditReportService">
> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
> >> <reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
> >> </service>
> >> <component name="CreditReportComponent">
> >> <implementation.java class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
> >> ...
> >> </composite>
> >>
> >> In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now ready to
> >> invoke
> >> the target POJO component.
> >>
> >> Source DataType will be AXIOM.
> >>
> >> Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component implementation
> >> which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the
> >> parameters.
> >> The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or
> >> introspection.
> >>
> >> Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same composite
> >>
> >> Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the
> >> application.
> >> With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of compatible
> >> interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
> >> "component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by interface
> >> CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by CreditReportService2.
> >> We
> >> assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB, same for
> >> CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
> >>
> >> public interface CreditReportService1 {
> >> public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
> >> }
> >>
> >> public interface CreditReportService2 {
> >> public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB customer);
> >> }
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Raymond
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
> >> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
> >> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
> >> return
> >> value
> >>
> >>
> >> > Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples,
> I'm
> >> not
> >> > sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely
> to
> >> > use
> >> > different databinding technologies on the same interface are you, and
> >> > would
> >> > a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this for
> >> > every
> >> > operation?
> >> >
> >> > ...ant
> >> >
> >> > On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding
> >> extension
> >> >> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example.
> >> >> Please
> >> >> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
> >> >>
> >> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
> >> >> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
> >> >> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
> >> >> <operation name="getCreditReport">
> >> >> <input>
> >> >> <part index="0">
> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> >> >> http://customer}Customer"/>
> >> >> </part>
> >> >> </input>
> >> >> <output>
> >> >> <part index="0">
> >> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> >> >> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
> >> >> </part>
> >> >> </output>
> >> >> </operation>
> >> >> </tuscany:databinding>
> >> >> </interface.java>
> >> >>
> >> >> Any opinions?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Raymond
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I don't see much difference to define DataTypes for WSDL portTypes than java
interfaces.
If we look at the WSDL structure, we can define default DataType for a
portType, an operation or a part.
portType
operation
input: message
part
output: message
part
fault: message
part
Usually, the part is typed by XSD. So it makes sense to have the DataType
such as SDO, JAXB, and XmlBeans.
An example may look like (for illustration only):
<interface.wsdl ...>
...
<tuscany:databinding
xmlns:tuscany="http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT" dataType="sdo">
<!-- default to sdo for the portType -->
<operation name="getCreditReport" dataType="sdo"> <!-- default to
sdo for the operation -->
<!-- more fine control -->
<input>
<part index="0">
<dataType name="sdo"
xmlType="{http://customer}Customer"/>
</part>
</input>
<output>
<part index="0">
<dataType name="sdo"
xmlType="{http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
</part>
</output>
</operation>
</tuscany:databinding>
</interface.wsdl>
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return
value
> What about when you're using interface.wsdl and things like JavaScript?
> Take
> the following composite example, could you show what the additional SCDL
> extension would be needed to get that to work with SDO and E4X?
>
> <composite ...>
>
> <service name="MyHelloWorldWebService" ...>
> <interface.wsdl.../>
> <binding.ws.../>
> <reference>HelloWorldComponent</reference>
> </service>
>
> <component name="HelloWorldComponent">
> <js:implementation.js script="HelloWorld.js"/>
> <references>
> <reference name="helloWorldService">HelloWorldService</reference>
> </references>
> </component>
>
> <reference name="HelloWorldService">
> <interface.wsdl..."/>
> <binding.ws.../>
> </reference>
>
> </composite>
>
> Thanks,
>
> ...ant
>
> On 8/23/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we have several use cases here:
>>
>> Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2 binding
>>
>> <composite ...>
>> <reference name="creditReport">
>> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> </reference>
>> ...
>> </composite>
>>
>> Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either
>> decorated
>> by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example, the
>> Customer
>> can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the DataType be
>> specified at parameter/return value level for a given operation. I'm not
>> sure at which level where the default databinding should be set,
>> interface,
>> or composite?
>>
>> Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService binding
>> uses
>> AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany runtime the
>> DataTypes it can support for references and services.
>>
>> Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the invocation to
>> a
>> POJO component
>>
>> <composite ...>
>> <service name="creditReportService">
>> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
>> <reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
>> </service>
>> <component name="CreditReportComponent">
>> <implementation.java class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
>> ...
>> </composite>
>>
>> In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now ready to
>> invoke
>> the target POJO component.
>>
>> Source DataType will be AXIOM.
>>
>> Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component implementation
>> which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the
>> parameters.
>> The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or
>> introspection.
>>
>> Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same composite
>>
>> Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the
>> application.
>> With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of compatible
>> interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
>> "component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by interface
>> CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by CreditReportService2.
>> We
>> assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB, same for
>> CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
>>
>> public interface CreditReportService1 {
>> public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
>> }
>>
>> public interface CreditReportService2 {
>> public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB customer);
>> }
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
>> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
>> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
>> return
>> value
>>
>>
>> > Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples, I'm
>> not
>> > sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely to
>> > use
>> > different databinding technologies on the same interface are you, and
>> > would
>> > a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this for
>> > every
>> > operation?
>> >
>> > ...ant
>> >
>> > On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding
>> extension
>> >> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example.
>> >> Please
>> >> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
>> >>
>> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
>> >> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
>> >> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
>> >> <operation name="getCreditReport">
>> >> <input>
>> >> <part index="0">
>> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> http://customer}Customer"/>
>> >> </part>
>> >> </input>
>> >> <output>
>> >> <part index="0">
>> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> >> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> >> </part>
>> >> </output>
>> >> </operation>
>> >> </tuscany:databinding>
>> >> </interface.java>
>> >>
>> >> Any opinions?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Raymond
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
What about when you're using interface.wsdl and things like JavaScript? Take
the following composite example, could you show what the additional SCDL
extension would be needed to get that to work with SDO and E4X?
<composite ...>
<service name="MyHelloWorldWebService" ...>
<interface.wsdl.../>
<binding.ws.../>
<reference>HelloWorldComponent</reference>
</service>
<component name="HelloWorldComponent">
<js:implementation.js script="HelloWorld.js"/>
<references>
<reference name="helloWorldService">HelloWorldService</reference>
</references>
</component>
<reference name="HelloWorldService">
<interface.wsdl..."/>
<binding.ws.../>
</reference>
</composite>
Thanks,
...ant
On 8/23/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think we have several use cases here:
>
> Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2 binding
>
> <composite ...>
> <reference name="creditReport">
> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
> </reference>
> ...
> </composite>
>
> Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either
> decorated
> by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example, the
> Customer
> can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the DataType be
> specified at parameter/return value level for a given operation. I'm not
> sure at which level where the default databinding should be set,
> interface,
> or composite?
>
> Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService binding
> uses
> AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany runtime the
> DataTypes it can support for references and services.
>
> Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the invocation to a
> POJO component
>
> <composite ...>
> <service name="creditReportService">
> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
> <reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
> </service>
> <component name="CreditReportComponent">
> <implementation.java class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
> ...
> </composite>
>
> In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now ready to
> invoke
> the target POJO component.
>
> Source DataType will be AXIOM.
>
> Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component implementation
> which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the parameters.
> The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or
> introspection.
>
> Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same composite
>
> Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the
> application.
> With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of compatible
> interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
> "component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by interface
> CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by CreditReportService2. We
> assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB, same for
> CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
>
> public interface CreditReportService1 {
> public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
> }
>
> public interface CreditReportService2 {
> public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB customer);
> }
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
> To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
> Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and
> return
> value
>
>
> > Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples, I'm
> not
> > sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely to
> > use
> > different databinding technologies on the same interface are you, and
> > would
> > a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this for
> > every
> > operation?
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> > On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding
> extension
> >> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example.
> >> Please
> >> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
> >>
> >> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
> >> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
> >> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
> >> <operation name="getCreditReport">
> >> <input>
> >> <part index="0">
> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> >> http://customer}Customer"/>
> >> </part>
> >> </input>
> >> <output>
> >> <part index="0">
> >> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
> >> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
> >> </part>
> >> </output>
> >> </operation>
> >> </tuscany:databinding>
> >> </interface.java>
> >>
> >> Any opinions?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Raymond
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return value
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I think we have several use cases here:
Case 1: Invoking a web service using a SCA reference with Axis2 binding
<composite ...>
<reference name="creditReport">
<interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
</reference>
...
</composite>
Source DataType is controlled by the application (it can be either decorated
by SCDL extensions or introspected from the value. For example, the Customer
can be a SDO or JAXB object). I see the requirement that the DataType be
specified at parameter/return value level for a given operation. I'm not
sure at which level where the default databinding should be set, interface,
or composite?
Target DataType is controlled by the binding. Axis2 WebService binding uses
AXIOM. We need a way for the binding builder to tell Tuscany runtime the
DataTypes it can support for references and services.
Case 2: SCA service with web service binding delegates the invocation to a
POJO component
<composite ...>
<service name="creditReportService">
<interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService"/>
<reference>CreditReportComponent</reference>
</service>
<component name="CreditReportComponent">
<implementation.java class="sample.CreditReportServiceImpl"/>
...
</composite>
In this case, the Axis2 binding gets AXIOM data and it's now ready to invoke
the target POJO component.
Source DataType will be AXIOM.
Target DataType will be controlled by the POJO component implementation
which can choose to use SDO, JAXB, or OMElement to receive the parameters.
The metadata can be extracted from SCDL, java annotations or introspection.
Case 3: One component invokes another component in the same composite
Both source DataType and target DataType are controlled by the application.
With the databinding, do we want to extend the concept of compatible
interfaces? For example, the "component1.reference1" is wired to
"component2.service1". "component1.reference1" is typed by interface
CreditReportService1 while component2.service1 by CreditReportService2. We
assume that CustomerSDO can be transformed to CustomerJAXB, same for
CreditReportJAXB to CreditReportSDO.
public interface CreditReportService1 {
public CreditReportSDO getCreditReport(CustomerSDO customer);
}
public interface CreditReportService2 {
public CreditReportJAXB getCreditReport(CustomerJAXB customer);
}
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters and return
value
> Could you give a bit more detail and a few more complete examples, I'm not
> sure I understand all this? It seems a lot of XML, you're not likely to
> use
> different databinding technologies on the same interface are you, and
> would
> a lot of this have defaults so you don't have to specify all this for
> every
> operation?
>
> ...ant
>
> On 8/21/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to define the XML schema for the tuscany databinding extension
>> to describe the data types for input and output. Here's an example.
>> Please
>> note "databinding" will be an extension to the interface type.
>>
>> <interface.java interface="sample.CreditReportService">
>> <tuscany:databinding xmlns:tuscany="
>> http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT>
>> <operation name="getCreditReport">
>> <input>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> http://customer}Customer"/>
>> </part>
>> </input>
>> <output>
>> <part index="0">
>> <dataType name="sdo" xmlType="{
>> http://credit}CreditReport" javaClass="...'/>
>> </part>
>> </output>
>> </operation>
>> </tuscany:databinding>
>> </interface.java>
>>
>> Any opinions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org