avoiding XML serialization, different WSDL generation, soap serialization

Discussion in 'ASP .Net Web Services' started by Ramunas Urbonas, Jul 20, 2004.

  1. Hello,

    I think my problem is interesting for most of developers who wish to
    exchange actual business entities with webservices, not just xml stubs.

    I can not use XML serialization, when generating wsdl, because some of
    transmited entities have only getters. It is required by our framework and
    cannot be avoided (to ensure data consistency in most cases).

    How do I exchange business entities in that case? I found several solutions,
    basically they all imply serializing my classes with soap/binary formatters
    and passing parameters as XmlElements, strings or byte arrays. That implies:
    1. versioning problems (but that can be avoided with extra work),
    2. anonymous parametes (any serialized object will be passed as
    XmlElement, or any other selected transfer type. Type validation will be
    performed only during run time, which leads to bugs).
    3. using XML serialization either way, just ussing "always XML
    serializable" format for parameters.

    How else could this problem be addressed? Suggestions are very welcome..

    regards,
    Ramunas Urbonas
    Ramunas Urbonas, Jul 20, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rather than transmitting the actual entities, have you considered using an
    Adapter (GoF 139) or Visitor (331) or Memento (283) ?

    -D

    "Ramunas Urbonas" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello,
    >
    > I think my problem is interesting for most of developers who wish to
    > exchange actual business entities with webservices, not just xml stubs.
    >
    > I can not use XML serialization, when generating wsdl, because some of
    > transmited entities have only getters. It is required by our framework and
    > cannot be avoided (to ensure data consistency in most cases).
    >
    > How do I exchange business entities in that case? I found several

    solutions,
    > basically they all imply serializing my classes with soap/binary

    formatters
    > and passing parameters as XmlElements, strings or byte arrays. That

    implies:
    > 1. versioning problems (but that can be avoided with extra work),
    > 2. anonymous parametes (any serialized object will be passed as
    > XmlElement, or any other selected transfer type. Type validation will be
    > performed only during run time, which leads to bugs).
    > 3. using XML serialization either way, just ussing "always XML
    > serializable" format for parameters.
    >
    > How else could this problem be addressed? Suggestions are very welcome..
    >
    > regards,
    > Ramunas Urbonas
    >
    >
    Dino Chiesa [Microsoft], Jul 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chris Bedford
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    579
    Chris Bedford
    Aug 21, 2003
  2. Thomas Guettler

    wsdl (soap) without code generation

    Thomas Guettler, Apr 2, 2008, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    314
    Thomas Guettler
    Apr 4, 2008
  3. Henrik Gøttig

    WSDL generation of types in different CLR namespaces

    Henrik Gøttig, Oct 10, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net Web Services
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    149
    Henrik Gøttig
    Oct 11, 2005
  4. Patrick Hurley

    SOAP Server WSDL generation

    Patrick Hurley, Mar 29, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    184
    leon breedt
    Mar 30, 2005
  5. Dan Fitzpatrick
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    346
    NAKAMURA, Hiroshi
    Jul 16, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page