![Daniel Cazzulino [MVP XML]](./core/images/default/default_avatar_large.png "Daniel Cazzulino [MVP XML]"){kind=avatar}
Re: Serialization with XmlSerializer: how to set the XML root node to something different from <ArrayOfClas sname>????
You can use:
[WebMethod]
[return: XmlArray("Custo mers")]
public Customer[] GetCustomers()
HTH
--
Daniel Cazzulino [MVP XML]
Clarius Consulting SA
"Bob Rock" <nospam.yet_ano ther_apprentice @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eEQ$5gEVEH A.1656@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Ahhh, so that is the way you can use the XmlArrayAttribu te and
> > > XmlArrayItemAtt ribute on something that is not a field!!!
> > > Is it possible to use it on methods returning arrays???[/color]
> >
> > Methods can return instances of Foo. Those instances of Foo will behave[/color]
> as[color=green]
> > indicated by the attributes on Foo.
> > If your method returns an array, then the attributes that apply are[/color][/color]
those[color=blue]
> on[color=green]
> > the base type.
> > So if it is an array of Foo that is being returned, then the attributes[/color][/color]
on[color=blue][color=green]
> > the Foo definition will apply to the elements of the array.[/color]
>
> The point here is not controlling the serialization of the elements of an
> array, but of the array itself, in other words of the xml root element.
>[color=green]
> > I believe it is not possible to effectively attribute arrays if they are[/color]
> not[color=green]
> > serialized as members of classes. In other words, if it is a local[/color]
> variable[color=green]
> > and you want to serialize it, I believe the attributes do not apply.[/color]
>
> That is not true ... controlling serialization of a class field that is an
> array is indeed very simple (XmlArrayAttrib ute and XmlArrayItemAtt ribute[/color]
is[color=blue]
> all that is needed).
>[color=green]
> > Also
> > if the array is a member variable and you do not serialize the entire[/color]
> class,[color=green]
> > then I believe the attributes do not apply.
> >[color=darkred]
> > > I've also seen that there is a way of setting the root node element to
> > > whatever one wants using the XmlSerializer(T ype, XmlRootAttribut e)
> > > constructor. Unfortunately when deserializing I need to change the[/color][/color][/color]
root[color=blue][color=green]
> > node[color=darkred]
> > > element to <ArrayOfClassna me> as the XmlSerializer expects to avoid[/color][/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > exception.[/color]
> >
> > Yes this should work, but I don't understand what the problem is on
> > de-serializing. If you are using the same kind of XmlSerializer
> > (constructed with the XmlRootAttribut e), then the string or stream with[/color]
> the[color=green]
> > modified root node should de-serialize just fine. eg[/color]
>
> Again, this is not true. Using the XmlSerializer constructor with the
> XmlRootAttribut e parameter lets you control only serialization ... it does
> not make the XmlSerializer instance *understand* an xml with the root node
> set to the XmlRootAttribut e parameter you are passing in when using that
> XmlSerializer instance to deserialize an xml into the array. It *still*
> expects the xml that it would generate normally (the one with
> <ArrayOfClassna me>).
>[color=green]
> >[color=darkred]
> > >Sorry for the cross-posting, but it is done only in the hope that more[/color]
> > people may read (and hopefully answer) my post.
> >[/color]
>[color=green]
> >. Yes, more people see it. But not more
> > people who care, or who will have anything to contribute.[/color]
>
> This is just your personal opinion.
> I posted not on *any* NG, but on NGs that I felt are visited by people[/color]
that[color=blue]
> could have the answer I was looking for .... xml or web services[/color]
newsgroups[color=blue]
> (and I believe serialization is something that should be well known by
> people dealing with WS).
>[color=green]
> > You could also
> > ask xml serialization questions to people you meet in the subway on the[/color]
> way[color=green]
> > to work, or at church, or in the stands at the ballgame, but I doubt[/color]
> you'll[color=green]
> > have much success there either.
> >
> > Imagine if everyone followed your policy. Every question on every topic
> > would get asked on every group. Would that work? The different groups[/color]
> are[color=green]
> > set up to raise the signal-to-noise ratio. If only works if the
> > participants follow the conventions.
> >
> > Sometimes cross-posts make sense because it is not clear what area the
> > question would fall under. 2 groups is reasonable. 3 is about the[/color][/color]
limit.[color=blue][color=green]
> > 4 is egregious.
> >
> > I am not making any of this up. This is just standard netiquette.
> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&n...+cross+posting
> >
> >
> > -D
> >[/color]
>
> Bob Rock
>
>
>[/color]
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 18/06/2004
You can use:
[WebMethod]
[return: XmlArray("Custo mers")]
public Customer[] GetCustomers()
HTH
--
Daniel Cazzulino [MVP XML]
Clarius Consulting SA
"Bob Rock" <nospam.yet_ano ther_apprentice @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eEQ$5gEVEH A.1656@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Ahhh, so that is the way you can use the XmlArrayAttribu te and
> > > XmlArrayItemAtt ribute on something that is not a field!!!
> > > Is it possible to use it on methods returning arrays???[/color]
> >
> > Methods can return instances of Foo. Those instances of Foo will behave[/color]
> as[color=green]
> > indicated by the attributes on Foo.
> > If your method returns an array, then the attributes that apply are[/color][/color]
those[color=blue]
> on[color=green]
> > the base type.
> > So if it is an array of Foo that is being returned, then the attributes[/color][/color]
on[color=blue][color=green]
> > the Foo definition will apply to the elements of the array.[/color]
>
> The point here is not controlling the serialization of the elements of an
> array, but of the array itself, in other words of the xml root element.
>[color=green]
> > I believe it is not possible to effectively attribute arrays if they are[/color]
> not[color=green]
> > serialized as members of classes. In other words, if it is a local[/color]
> variable[color=green]
> > and you want to serialize it, I believe the attributes do not apply.[/color]
>
> That is not true ... controlling serialization of a class field that is an
> array is indeed very simple (XmlArrayAttrib ute and XmlArrayItemAtt ribute[/color]
is[color=blue]
> all that is needed).
>[color=green]
> > Also
> > if the array is a member variable and you do not serialize the entire[/color]
> class,[color=green]
> > then I believe the attributes do not apply.
> >[color=darkred]
> > > I've also seen that there is a way of setting the root node element to
> > > whatever one wants using the XmlSerializer(T ype, XmlRootAttribut e)
> > > constructor. Unfortunately when deserializing I need to change the[/color][/color][/color]
root[color=blue][color=green]
> > node[color=darkred]
> > > element to <ArrayOfClassna me> as the XmlSerializer expects to avoid[/color][/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > exception.[/color]
> >
> > Yes this should work, but I don't understand what the problem is on
> > de-serializing. If you are using the same kind of XmlSerializer
> > (constructed with the XmlRootAttribut e), then the string or stream with[/color]
> the[color=green]
> > modified root node should de-serialize just fine. eg[/color]
>
> Again, this is not true. Using the XmlSerializer constructor with the
> XmlRootAttribut e parameter lets you control only serialization ... it does
> not make the XmlSerializer instance *understand* an xml with the root node
> set to the XmlRootAttribut e parameter you are passing in when using that
> XmlSerializer instance to deserialize an xml into the array. It *still*
> expects the xml that it would generate normally (the one with
> <ArrayOfClassna me>).
>[color=green]
> >[color=darkred]
> > >Sorry for the cross-posting, but it is done only in the hope that more[/color]
> > people may read (and hopefully answer) my post.
> >[/color]
>[color=green]
> >. Yes, more people see it. But not more
> > people who care, or who will have anything to contribute.[/color]
>
> This is just your personal opinion.
> I posted not on *any* NG, but on NGs that I felt are visited by people[/color]
that[color=blue]
> could have the answer I was looking for .... xml or web services[/color]
newsgroups[color=blue]
> (and I believe serialization is something that should be well known by
> people dealing with WS).
>[color=green]
> > You could also
> > ask xml serialization questions to people you meet in the subway on the[/color]
> way[color=green]
> > to work, or at church, or in the stands at the ballgame, but I doubt[/color]
> you'll[color=green]
> > have much success there either.
> >
> > Imagine if everyone followed your policy. Every question on every topic
> > would get asked on every group. Would that work? The different groups[/color]
> are[color=green]
> > set up to raise the signal-to-noise ratio. If only works if the
> > participants follow the conventions.
> >
> > Sometimes cross-posts make sense because it is not clear what area the
> > question would fall under. 2 groups is reasonable. 3 is about the[/color][/color]
limit.[color=blue][color=green]
> > 4 is egregious.
> >
> > I am not making any of this up. This is just standard netiquette.
> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&n...+cross+posting
> >
> >
> > -D
> >[/color]
>
> Bob Rock
>
>
>[/color]
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 18/06/2004
Comment