W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > August 2008

Re: BytesMessage vs. TextMessage

From: Glen Daniels <glen@wso2.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:06:14 -0400
Message-ID: <4899AFD6.4050806@wso2.com>
To: Mark R Maxey <Mark_R_Maxey@raytheon.com>, public-soap-jms@w3.org

Hi Mark:

Mark R Maxey wrote:
> Can someone explain the rationale for limiting SOAP/JMS to 
> BytesMessages?  We currently successfully use TextMessages when sending 
> SOAP/WebSphere MQ.  It seems to me that this should be a choice left up 
> to the stakeholders of the interface.

We had to make sure that we could transport both normal SOAP and MTOM 
(which has real binary content).  We settled on BytesMessage because it 
allows all our use cases without yet another parameter.  If we allowed 
other kinds of messages as well we'd need to have another property to 
differentiate.

If nodes (SOAP nodes that is) are going to use this binding to 
communicate, they will be prepared to accept BytesMessages - the only 
use case I could see for TextMessages as well would be to communicate 
with other systems that are NOT aware of this binding... and that's out 
of scope for us, I think.

Thanks,
--Glen
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 14:09:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:17 GMT