Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3651Re: [soapbuilders] usage of custom classes in requests

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Layman
    Jun 5, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Ed asks about custom classes, saying "So, whenever the interface
      for these classes changes (say we add a new required field), we would have
      to redistribute the client classes. This could become a distribution
      nightmare."

      The problem is real, but it is not the fault of custom classes. It comes
      about because you say that the new field is required. If it truly is, then
      the client will not know what to do with the field, custom or not.

      This is why SOAP and schemas make such a big deal about required vs.
      optional.


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Ed Keen" <edk@...>
      To: <soap-user@...>
      Cc: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 7:41 AM
      Subject: [soapbuilders] usage of custom classes in requests


      I would like feedback on the whether or not any of you are using custom
      classes in your soap calls. While it is definitely convenient on the Apache
      server side (with its serializers & deserializers), it places an extra
      burden on the client, because now they must have these custom classes on
      their side too. For win32 clients, this becomes an even more difficult
      task. Our company would probably wind up writing a DLL that would contain
      the analog of our custom classes for Windows. So, whenever the interface
      for these classes changes (say we add a new required field), we would have
      to redistribute the client classes. This could become a distribution
      nightmare.

      I am wondering if it would be less trouble to just have the clients send all
      their data as separate parameters (which could make for a long parameter
      list, I know) to some proxy-type servlet on the server-side which would
      intercept the soap call, package that data into our custom classes, and send
      the request on its way. It's more work on the server-side, but it would
      avoid the need to distribute these custom serailizable client classes.

      Does any of that make sense? What are the rest of you doing in regards to
      this? Please don't tell me to use WSDL. Been there. Tried that.

      Thanks,
      Ed


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic