possible enhancement for anyType

[arskom]

possible enhancement for anyType

[plq]

i have mixed feelings about this. i think you should be using proper object definitions if you need such a functionality.

any is just a more efficient way to communicate valid xml through soap, nothing more.

[ba-serge]

In no way I propose to delete the default Any class. I'd rather propose to add something like AnyAsKnownType.

The problem is that the document/literal wrapped wsdl type does not support overloading, so that if you have a method working with several types you can use either XML Schema inheritance from abstract base or any type. Now, as fas as I know soaplib does not support abstract attribute, so you are left only with anyType.

Besides, here is a citation from wsdl specs:
"Use the xsd:anyType type to represent a field/parameter which can have any type. "

[plq]

In no way I propose to delete the default Any class.

i didn't say you were.

The problem is that the document/literal wrapped wsdl type does not support overloading, so that if you have a method working with several types you can use either XML Schema inheritance from abstract base or any type. Now, as fas as I know soaplib does not support abstract attribute, so you are left only with anyType.

huh. python doesn't (officially) support method overloading. how will you define the service with soaplib?

it shouldn't be that hard to add abstract bases to soaplib. why not work on the proper solution instead of hacks and workarounds?

"Use the xsd:anyType type to represent a field/parameter which can have any type. "

that's right. so if you know the type in advance, you shouldn't be using it.

those said, did you look at lxml.objectify? it's like cPickle for xml.

[ba-serge]

Yep, Python does not support overloading either. But! Python is duck typed, so it does not
care about types at all, for me it is almost "overloading", whereas the soap layer forces types. Now, if I have several complex types in my wsdl, that are suitable for my operation why not to allow anyType for that operation? Here is a live example, I have a data bank (ZODB in fact) that stores any types I throw, my real data can be quite different. I store some geometrical data that can be either primitives or very complex finite element models.

it shouldn't be that hard to add abstract bases to soaplib. why not work on the proper >solution instead of hacks and workarounds?
I wouldn't say it is a hack. It is just a convenience thing some may find useful. But you may be right to implement abstract instead.

I have to check what lxml.objectify is

[plq]

no activity for a looong time, closing. reopen if you're back on the subject.