You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by mahalingam <ma...@ceruleaninfotech.com> on 2005/08/03 09:59:57 UTC

JBoss and SOAP message

Hi ..

How can i send SOAP message attachment in Jboss .It is deployed using Axis 


Regards
mahalingam





On Wednesday 03 August 2005 13:10, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> ARGH I hate it :( .. would we not be creating a parallel structure to
> MessageContext? I suggest (1) and pass the MC into the serialization
> stuff? I any case, whether to gen the xml decl could depend on the
> transport (think http vs tcp) and then you need the MC to know the
> transport.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 12:18 +0530, Shahi, Ashutosh wrote:
> > +1 to the main idea. This is how even SAAJ manages XML declaration and
> > character encoding.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ashutosh
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > From: Eran Chinthaka [mailto:chinthaka@opensource.lk]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 6:50 AM
> > To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> > Subject: [Axis2] SOAPMessage
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Current source, we have only the SOAPEnvelope that contains the soap
> > message. But IMO, I think its better to have SOAPMessage as well to
> > contain XML Declaration, Encoding, etc.,
> >
> > So that when sending a message transport will get the output from
> > SOAPMessage.serialize, not SOAPEnvelope.serialize.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here are the evaluations of other alternations to solve the above
> > problem.
> >
> >
> >
> > 1. put those stuff in message context.
> >
> > Serializing code is in the envelope and it doesn't have access to the
> > message context. If someone needs to serialize he must be able to do
> > it without having a message context.
> >
> > 2. Put this information in OMOutputImpl. This is not practical as we
> > create a new OMOutputImpl whenever we want to serialize. So I don't
> > think it’s a good idea to have state within the OMOutputImpl.
> >
> >
> >
> > So what do you all think about this suggestion. This may involve some
> > changes to the code.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Chinthaka