Yep, I agreed, make more sense from java to wsdl than from wsdl to java.
James
> Yeah, I think its definitely a waste of time to do an Aegis
> schema->java. We would gain absolutely no benefit from it as far as I
> can tell :-)
>
> - Dan
>
> Daniel Kulp wrote:
>> I had this conversation with Dan D. before and the thoughts were pretty
>> much exactly the same. If you are generating java code from schema,
>> you should use the "standard" JAXB stuff since that supports more of the
>> schema types than Aegis does. Aegis is primarily targeted for the
>> Java first case. Having java -> wsdl tools for it makes sense.
>> However, the wsdl -> java stuff makes less sense.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> On Friday 21 September 2007, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>> I'm wondering why anyone would want this. If the user is going to run
>>> a code generator, what's wrong with JAXB? The virtue of Aegis is to
>>> avoid an infestation of snails (@) in existing code. Once you are
>>> firing up a generator, it's new code.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I note that Aegis has some not-very-documented capabilities, and I
>>> wonder if some of them are superior to JAXB in some way.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do we ever post some sort of [POLL] to the user list asking 'who would
>>> use this feature' questions?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dan Diephouse
> MuleSource
>
http://mulesource.com |
http://netzooid.com/blog
