[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       axis-dev
Subject:    Re: [Axis2] Data binding attachments support (was: CHAT LOG : 2006-03-29)
From:       "Davanum Srinivas" <davanum () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-03-31 13:53:58
Message-ID: 19e0530f0603310553m12e50509nd8ac6226d3b0d007 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Sanjiva,

May be i am missing something...the difference in my mind is a person
implementing a databinding layer should be able to access the
attachements without having to build the om tree. straight from stax
to java objects with no om and use whatever they need to store the
attachments byte arrays or data handlers or some databinding specific
construct.

-- dims

On 3/31/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@opensource.lk> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 15:35 +0600, Thilina Gunarathne wrote:
> > <quote Glen>
> > What we want is a "thingy" which can be stored away and LATER used to
> > get the real attachment data after all XML pulling is done
> > </quote>
> >
> > IMHO we are doing the exactly the same thing using OMTexts.. Currently
> > we are doing this with more flexibility and of course with a catch..
> > Flexibility is given by allowing the users to get the real attachment
> > data if they wish while pulling the XML.. Catch is that we are
> > buffering the SOAP Envelope in the MIME Parser which is underneath the
> > StaxReader...
>
> Thilina, I don't see this as a catch - isn't it impossible to get to any
> attachments without buffering the SOAP envelope? Or are you thinking
> about reading the SOAP envelope and buffering it IFF someone actually
> refers to an attachment?
>
> While that's interesting in theory, whoever sent the attachment more
> often than not expected the other end to read the darn thing. I don't
> see the point of that potential optimization. Maybe I'm missing
> something.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]