axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanj...@opensource.lk>
Subject Re: WSDL 2.0 is a non-goal for Axis2 1.0?
Date Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:41:36 GMT
Um, NONE of these require us to remove WOM and do what you are
suggesting. 

Sanjiva.

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 13:38 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Sanjiva,
> 
> We are facing the following situation:
> 
> Data points:
> - AFAIK, Woden will not do WSDL11 anytime soon
> - For a java class with no wsdl, we need a place to store
> targetnamespace
> (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113678047126352&w=2)
> - For a java class with no wsdl, we need a place to specify the schema
> namespace (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113678152504708&w=2)
> - If people  codegen stuff and don't drop wsdl's into META-INF "?wsdl"
> is pretty much useless
> - Even if they drop wsdl's that's problematic with imports
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113686890610717&w=2
> - You mentioned that we could flatten the wsdl's
> (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113687004010150&w=2), how
> is this different from keeping a wom?
> - Original wsdl, annotations, services.xml all affect the service that
> the user deploys, we need a model where this information is aggregated
> (see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113686675028357&w=2)
> 
> Are these data points enough to make us revisit a decision?
> 
> thanks,
> dims
> 
> On 1/10/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@opensource.lk> wrote:
> > We went down the WOM path for a reason. Until we get Woden I am most
> > definitely -1 to removing it. Maybe we don't use it to its fullest
> > extent but what are we achieving by doing this major surgery at this
> > stage?
> >
> > This was discussed at the hackathon at ApacheCon and this path was
> > decided. We made a decision and I see no reason to re-visit that all of
> > a sudden.
> >
> > I have no problem with saying WSDL 2.0 is a non-goal for 1.0 .. that has
> > been the case from day 1 because we were targetting (and still are) to
> > get to 1.0 before WSDL 2.0 is done.
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> >
> > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:31 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > > Ajith,
> > >
> > > Am trying to start a discussion. Personally, I really don't want to
> > > get rid of it. I want it to be the center of what we do with
> > > AxisService. Am trying to re-state what has been said on multiple
> > > threads, for example.
> > >
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113687038805762&w=2
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113687086414152&w=2
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=113688521503643&w=2
> > >
> > > I want us to make a conscious decision and stick to it!!
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > dims
> > >
> > > On 1/10/06, Ajith Ranabahu <ajith.ranabahu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ahum...
> > > >  Are you serious Dims ? I mean about getting rid of WOM ? For me it seems
> > > > getting rid of WOM is not that easy (codegenerator completely depends
on it)
> > > > and the WSDL 2.0 is taking shape and will be finalized soon (which means
we
> > > > should be supporting it anyway)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 1/10/06, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Team,
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's get rid of of WOM and declare that we will use only wsdl4j
which
> > > > > implies hence WSDL 2.0 is a non-goal for Axis2 1.0. IF we get a
> > > > > release from woden that includes parsing WSDL1.1 THEN we will
> > > > > reconsider.
> > > > >
> > > > > sounds like a plan?
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > dims
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Ajith Ranabahu
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/


Mime
View raw message