Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>
> If this can be done without too much work, I think this is excellent.
> I agree with your analysis that asking them to write assembler is just
> too much.
>
+1.
> What's your take on the implementation complexity?
>
Wouldnt it be writing another Handler Tube?
-vivek.
>
> Rama Pulavarthi wrote:
>> Now and then, we suggest users to write their own Tube to process the
>> Message like Handler and plug it in by writing a a new
>> TubelineAssembler.
>> The reason for this is using SOAPHandler might be costly as they work
>> on DOM based SOAPMessage.
>>
>> Writing a TubelineAssembler for simple uses is difficult. How about
>> we provide a new Protocol Handler to work on com.sun.xml.ws.Message.
>>
>> public interface MessageHandler<T extends RIMessageContext>
>> extends Handler<T> {
>>
>> }
>>
>> public interface RIMessageContext
>> extends MessageContext {
>>
>> /** Gets the message from this message context
>> *
>> * @return The contained message; returns <code>null</code> if no
>> * message is present in this message context
>> **/
>> public com.sun.xml.ws.api.Message getMessage();
>> }
>>
>>
>> This way user can write a simple handler extending MessageHandler and
>> can be plugged in easily.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Rama Pulavarthi
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jax-ws.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jax-ws.dev.java.net
>>
>>
>
>