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

Vector as return type

Expand Messages
  • a_karuna@hotmail.com
    Hi: I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that returns a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector datatype be
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 20, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi:
      I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that returns
      a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
      datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
      Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl automatically).
      Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors HashMaps and
      such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks
    • Simon Fell
      using array s would be the most natural mapping for vectors. Cheers Simon ... From: a_karuna@hotmail.com [mailto:a_karuna@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 20, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        using array's would be the most natural mapping for vectors.

        Cheers
        Simon

        -----Original Message-----
        From: a_karuna@... [mailto:a_karuna@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM
        To: wsdl@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [wsdl] Vector as return type


        Hi:
        I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that returns
        a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
        datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
        Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl automatically).
        Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors HashMaps and
        such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks


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



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Tim Blake
        Simon, I agree that using arrays seems like a sensible solution, but imagine the following scenario: I have a Java class which has a method which takes a
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 25, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Simon,

          I agree that using arrays seems like a sensible solution, but imagine the
          following scenario:

          I have a Java class which has a method which takes a String and returns a
          Vector. I create a WSDL document which publishes this interface and maps the
          Vector to an array using XML Schema. A client of this WSDL document then
          uses it to generate Java Proxy code for calling the Web Service. The proxy
          generator will recognize the return type of the method in WSDL as an array
          (correctly) and generate accordingly.

          Surely this will then lead to a runtime type mismatch in most
          implementations, since the serialisation of arrays and vectors is not
          identical? Don't we need a standard mechanism for defining certain java
          types (such as Vector and Map) within XML Schema, as is defined for arrays
          within SOAP.

          Thanks,
          Tim


          Simon Fell wrote:

          > using array's would be the most natural mapping for vectors.
          >
          > Cheers
          > Simon
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: a_karuna@... [mailto:a_karuna@...]
          > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM
          > To: wsdl@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [wsdl] Vector as return type
          >
          > Hi:
          > I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that returns
          > a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
          > datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
          > Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl automatically).
          > Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors HashMaps and
          > such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > wsdl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > wsdl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

          --
          --------------------------------------------------------------------
          Tim Blake (Oracle JDeveloper)

          Web Services / Activity Modeling (EAI) / eBusiness Integration
          Oracle Corporation, TVP 520 Reading UK

          T: 0118 9244944 || M: 07968 620613 || F: 0118 9245148
          Email: timothy.blake@...
          --------------------------------------------------------------------
        • Simon Fell
          No i disagree. The mapping from the array wire type to the native Array or vector type is purely an implementation detail, and should not be exposed in the
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 25, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            No i disagree. The mapping from the array wire type to the native
            Array or vector type is purely an implementation detail, and should
            not be exposed in the service description. Otherwise we'll slowly end
            up with large collections of definitions of various vector
            implementations for all the different platform / tools.

            The tools should allow you to specify that SOAP-ENC:Array is mapped to
            vector (or whatever).

            I would suggest that if a serialized vector and an serialized array
            look different, then the implementation is broken.

            Map is a separate issue, and has been discussed quite a few times,
            with no definitive outcome. There's a rather long thread on the
            soapbuilders list about it starting here
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soapbuilders/message/1331

            Cheers
            Simon


            On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 16:54:34 +0100, in wsdl you wrote:

            >
            >Simon,
            >
            >I agree that using arrays seems like a sensible solution, but imagine the
            >following scenario:
            >
            >I have a Java class which has a method which takes a String and returns a
            >Vector. I create a WSDL document which publishes this interface and maps the
            >Vector to an array using XML Schema. A client of this WSDL document then
            >uses it to generate Java Proxy code for calling the Web Service. The proxy
            >generator will recognize the return type of the method in WSDL as an array
            >(correctly) and generate accordingly.
            >
            >Surely this will then lead to a runtime type mismatch in most
            >implementations, since the serialisation of arrays and vectors is not
            >identical? Don't we need a standard mechanism for defining certain java
            >types (such as Vector and Map) within XML Schema, as is defined for arrays
            >within SOAP.
            >
            >Thanks,
            >Tim
            >
            >
            >Simon Fell wrote:
            >
            >> using array's would be the most natural mapping for vectors.
            >>
            >> Cheers
            >> Simon
            >>
            >> -----Original Message-----
            >> From: a_karuna@... [mailto:a_karuna@...]
            >> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM
            >> To: wsdl@yahoogroups.com
            >> Subject: [wsdl] Vector as return type
            >>
            >> Hi:
            >> I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that returns
            >> a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
            >> datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
            >> Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl automatically).
            >> Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors HashMaps and
            >> such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks
            >>
            >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >> wsdl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >>
            >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >> wsdl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • weiqunmi@yahoo.com
            I agree with Simon that the Vector type is implementation detail and should not appear as a type in SOAP body. And with the current Apache/IBM SOAP
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 7, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              I agree with Simon that the Vector type is implementation detail and
              should not appear as a type in SOAP body. And with the current
              Apache/IBM SOAP implementation, there is no simple solution to this
              problem because by using XMLJavaMappingRegistry, all proxies share
              the same deserializer for one QName. Unless you can register the
              deserializer with the proxy as well as the QName, you can not
              deserialize an SOAP array to array in one case and to Vector in
              another.

              --- In wsdl@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
              > No i disagree. The mapping from the array wire type to the native
              > Array or vector type is purely an implementation detail, and should
              > not be exposed in the service description. Otherwise we'll slowly
              end
              > up with large collections of definitions of various vector
              > implementations for all the different platform / tools.
              >
              > The tools should allow you to specify that SOAP-ENC:Array is mapped
              to
              > vector (or whatever).
              >
              > I would suggest that if a serialized vector and an serialized array
              > look different, then the implementation is broken.
              >
              > Map is a separate issue, and has been discussed quite a few times,
              > with no definitive outcome. There's a rather long thread on the
              > soapbuilders list about it starting here
              > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soapbuilders/message/1331
              >
              > Cheers
              > Simon
              >
              >
              > On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 16:54:34 +0100, in wsdl you wrote:
              >
              > >
              > >Simon,
              > >
              > >I agree that using arrays seems like a sensible solution, but
              imagine the
              > >following scenario:
              > >
              > >I have a Java class which has a method which takes a String and
              returns a
              > >Vector. I create a WSDL document which publishes this interface
              and maps the
              > >Vector to an array using XML Schema. A client of this WSDL
              document then
              > >uses it to generate Java Proxy code for calling the Web Service.
              The proxy
              > >generator will recognize the return type of the method in WSDL as
              an array
              > >(correctly) and generate accordingly.
              > >
              > >Surely this will then lead to a runtime type mismatch in most
              > >implementations, since the serialisation of arrays and vectors is
              not
              > >identical? Don't we need a standard mechanism for defining
              certain java
              > >types (such as Vector and Map) within XML Schema, as is defined
              for arrays
              > >within SOAP.
              > >
              > >Thanks,
              > >Tim
              > >
              > >
              > >Simon Fell wrote:
              > >
              > >> using array's would be the most natural mapping for vectors.
              > >>
              > >> Cheers
              > >> Simon
              > >>
              > >> -----Original Message-----
              > >> From: a_karuna@h... [mailto:a_karuna@h...]
              > >> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM
              > >> To: wsdl@y...
              > >> Subject: [wsdl] Vector as return type
              > >>
              > >> Hi:
              > >> I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that
              returns
              > >> a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
              > >> datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
              > >> Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl
              automatically).
              > >> Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors
              HashMaps and
              > >> such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks
              > >>
              > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > >> wsdl-unsubscribe@y...
              > >>
              > >>
              > >>
              > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > >>
              > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > >> wsdl-unsubscribe@y...
              > >>
              > >>
              > >>
              > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Glen Daniels
              Just a note re: your message - this situation has been remedied in Axis (Apache SOAP 3.0). Axis automatically serializes any Java object which implements
              Message 6 of 6 , Aug 7, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Just a note re: your message - this situation has been remedied in Axis
                (Apache SOAP 3.0). Axis automatically serializes any Java object which
                implements "List" as a SOAP Array, and will deserialize a SOAP Array into a
                typed Array or an appropriate List class depending on context.

                http://xml.apache.org/axis

                --Glen

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: <weiqunmi@...>
                To: <wsdl@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:58 PM
                Subject: [wsdl] Re: Vector as return type


                > I agree with Simon that the Vector type is implementation detail and
                > should not appear as a type in SOAP body. And with the current
                > Apache/IBM SOAP implementation, there is no simple solution to this
                > problem because by using XMLJavaMappingRegistry, all proxies share
                > the same deserializer for one QName. Unless you can register the
                > deserializer with the proxy as well as the QName, you can not
                > deserialize an SOAP array to array in one case and to Vector in
                > another.
                >
                > --- In wsdl@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
                > > No i disagree. The mapping from the array wire type to the native
                > > Array or vector type is purely an implementation detail, and should
                > > not be exposed in the service description. Otherwise we'll slowly
                > end
                > > up with large collections of definitions of various vector
                > > implementations for all the different platform / tools.
                > >
                > > The tools should allow you to specify that SOAP-ENC:Array is mapped
                > to
                > > vector (or whatever).
                > >
                > > I would suggest that if a serialized vector and an serialized array
                > > look different, then the implementation is broken.
                > >
                > > Map is a separate issue, and has been discussed quite a few times,
                > > with no definitive outcome. There's a rather long thread on the
                > > soapbuilders list about it starting here
                > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soapbuilders/message/1331
                > >
                > > Cheers
                > > Simon
                > >
                > >
                > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 16:54:34 +0100, in wsdl you wrote:
                > >
                > > >
                > > >Simon,
                > > >
                > > >I agree that using arrays seems like a sensible solution, but
                > imagine the
                > > >following scenario:
                > > >
                > > >I have a Java class which has a method which takes a String and
                > returns a
                > > >Vector. I create a WSDL document which publishes this interface
                > and maps the
                > > >Vector to an array using XML Schema. A client of this WSDL
                > document then
                > > >uses it to generate Java Proxy code for calling the Web Service.
                > The proxy
                > > >generator will recognize the return type of the method in WSDL as
                > an array
                > > >(correctly) and generate accordingly.
                > > >
                > > >Surely this will then lead to a runtime type mismatch in most
                > > >implementations, since the serialisation of arrays and vectors is
                > not
                > > >identical? Don't we need a standard mechanism for defining
                > certain java
                > > >types (such as Vector and Map) within XML Schema, as is defined
                > for arrays
                > > >within SOAP.
                > > >
                > > >Thanks,
                > > >Tim
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >Simon Fell wrote:
                > > >
                > > >> using array's would be the most natural mapping for vectors.
                > > >>
                > > >> Cheers
                > > >> Simon
                > > >>
                > > >> -----Original Message-----
                > > >> From: a_karuna@h... [mailto:a_karuna@h...]
                > > >> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM
                > > >> To: wsdl@y...
                > > >> Subject: [wsdl] Vector as return type
                > > >>
                > > >> Hi:
                > > >> I have a web service (as a Java class) that has a method that
                > returns
                > > >> a Vector. In the wsdl doc for this service, how would the Vector
                > > >> datatype be represented? (The IBM Toolkit aborts with "NASSL
                > > >> Exception Occured" when I try to generate the wsdl
                > automatically).
                > > >> Is there some simple way of representing Arrays, Vectors
                > HashMaps and
                > > >> such in WSDL docs? Please help. Thanks
                > > >>
                > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > > >> wsdl-unsubscribe@y...
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                > > >>
                > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > > >> wsdl-unsubscribe@y...
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > wsdl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.