Hi Mike:

That kind of support doesn't exist currently, but could be added.  For instance, YOU 
could add it and submit a patch... :)

--Glen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Burati [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:25 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Make beanMapping default
> 
> 
> 
> Cool...   Any chance that could/would be configurable (both 
> config files
> and/or via API) such that a different default serializer 
> could be explicitly
> set (eg, if someone with a particular need wanted to replace or wrap
> BeanSerializer with one that had it's own logic for 
> determining whether
> something was a Bean or another well-known (to the platform) type)?
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 10:30 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Make beanMapping default
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Joel!
> 
> There is some unfinished support in Axis for "autoTyping", 
> which sounds like
> what you want.  AutoTyping, when switched on, will take any 
> class which it
> doesn't find a mapping for and use the Bean 
> serializer/deserializer with an
> XML type QName of "java:package.subpackage.classname".
> 
> The problem is that I never finished the configuration portion of this
> stuff.  It wouldn't take much to add, something like putting 
> <parameter
> name="doAutoTyping" value="true"/> in your WSDD....
> 
> --Glen
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shellman, Joel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 10:15 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: Make beanMapping default
> > 
> > 
> > We have a bunch of classes that are going to be sent across 
> > the wire and
> > would really rather not have to specify beanMapping (they 
> > should all work
> > with the beanMapper) for each and every one of them for 
> each and every
> > service. Is there a way to set it up such that if it doesn't 
> > have a specific
> > mapping set up, it will automatically try to use a beanMapping?
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > Joel Shellman
> > 
> 

Reply via email to