I am using the XmlSerializer, and was wondering if there is any way, using overrides or something to that effect to get the XmlSerializer to output the types of some nodes.
My problem is that I have serialized a byte array.
class MyClass {
public string Name { get; set; }
public byte[] Bytes { get; set; }
}
I am consuming the xml in a generic service.
The service collects the xml as .
<MyClass>
<Name>Test</Name>
<Bytes>U2NhcnkgQnVnZ2Vy</Bytes>
</MyClass>
Is there any way to either generate an xsd at runtime, or somehow output something like this.
I cannot change the class I am serializing, but I can apply overrides to the serializer or in some other way control the serialization.
<Bytes xsi:type='BinaryOfSomeKind'>BlahBlah</Bytes>
I need to know that the data is binary somehow.
Thanks
Craig.
If your class is supplied by a third party then you know your properties and property types and you can deduce your XML and XSD from it. You can create your XSD manually or with the help of a XML tool for example XMLSpy (not free BTW) or XMLFox which is free of charge.
If you know the xml is going to be in that format that you put in the question and you have your class ready you can decorate it as such for it to be deserialized.
The Deserialization class:
[XmlTypeAttribute]
[XmlRootAttribute("MyClass")]
public class MyClass
{
[XmlElementAttribute("Name")]
public string Name { get; set; }
[XmlElementAttribute("Bytes")]
public byte[] Bytes { get; set; }
}
The Deserialzation Method
public static object Deserialize(string xml)
{
var deserializer = new System.Xml.Serialization.XmlSerializer(typeof(MyClass));
using (var reader = XmlReader.Create(new StringReader(xml)))
{
return (MyClass)deserializer.Deserialize(reader);
}
}
The Main Method
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string xml = #"<MyClass>
<Name>Test</Name>
<Bytes>U2NhcnkgQnVnZ2Vy</Bytes>
</MyClass>";
MyClass obj = (MyClass)Deserialize(xml);
Console.ReadKey();
}
Make sure to add the following using statements:
using System.Xml.Serialization;
using System.Xml;
It deserialized it into an obj with "Test" as the byte array.
If you generate the XSD at run time, then theres no way you can know what properties there are and it would be down to using reflection to test for specific properties, and then subsequently finding out what types they may be, is this what your after?
Related
I have the following Console application:
using System;
using System.IO;
using System.Xml.Serialization;
using Newtonsoft.Json;
namespace OutputApp
{
public class Foo
{
public object Value1 { get; set; }
public string Value2 { get; set; }
}
public class Bar
{
public int Arg1 { get; set; }
public double Arg2 { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
public static Foo CreateFooBar()
{
return new Foo
{
Value1 = new Bar
{
Arg1 = 123,
Arg2 = 99.9
},
Value2 = "Test"
};
}
public static string SerializeXml(object obj)
{
using (var stream = new MemoryStream())
{
using (var reader = new StreamReader(stream))
{
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(obj.GetType());
serializer.Serialize(stream, obj);
stream.Position = 0;
return reader.ReadToEnd();
}
}
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var fooBar = CreateFooBar();
// Using Newtonsoft.Json
var json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(fooBar, Formatting.Indented);
var xnode = JsonConvert.DeserializeXNode(json, "RootElement");
var xml = xnode.ToString();
// Using XmlSerializer, throws InvalidOperationException
var badXml = SerializeXml(fooBar);
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
I have two classes. Class Foo and class Bar. Class Foo has a property of type object. This is a requirement, because it is a contract which can hold a variety of objects and therefore I cannot set the property to a concrete type or a generic.
Now I compose a dummy fooBar object using the CreateFooBar() method. After that I first serialize it into JSON, which works wonderfully with Json.Net.
Then I use Json.Net's XML converter method to convert the json string into an XNode object. It works great as well.
The output of both is the following:
{
"Value1": {
"Arg1": 123,
"Arg2": 99.9
},
"Value2": "Test"
}
<RootElement>
<Value1>
<Arg1>123</Arg1>
<Arg2>99.9</Arg2>
</Value1>
<Value2>Test</Value2>
</RootElement>
Now while this works, it is certainly not very nice, because I have to serialize into json only to serialize it into xml afterwards. I would like to serialize directly into xml.
When I use the XmlSerializer to do this I get the infamous InvalidOperationExceptoin, because I did not decorate my classes with the XmlInclude attribute or did one of the other workarounds.
InvalidOperationException
The type OutputApp.Bar was not expected. Use the XmlInclude or
SoapInclude attribute to specify types that are not known statically.
None of the workarounds for the XmlSerializer is a good solution IMHO and I don't see the need for it as it is perfectly feasible to serialize an object into XML without crappy attributes.
Does anyone know a good Xml serializer in .NET which can do this or is there a plan to add this feature to Json.Net?
Any ideas?
Update1
I am not opposed to use attributes, but it needs to make sense. What I don't like about the XmlInclude attribute is that it forces me into circular dependencies. Say I have assembly A which defines a base class, and assembly B which implements derived classes. Now the way the XmlInclude attribute works is that I'd have to decorate the base class in Assembly A with the type name of the child class from assembly B. This would mean I have a circular dependency and is a no go!
Update2
I shall clarify that I am not looking for a solution to re-factor my console application to make it work with the XmlSerializer, I am looking for a way to XML serialize what I have there.
There was a comment below which mentions that using object as a data type is poor design. Whether this is true or not, this is a whole other discussion. The point is that there is no reason why it shouldn't be able to serialize into XML and I am curious to find such a solution.
Personally I find creating a "marker" interface a dirty design. It abusing an interface to workaround the incapabilities of one single .NET class (XmlSerializer). If I would ever swap the serialization library for something else, then the whole marker interface would be redundant clutter. I don't want to couple my classes to one serializer.
I am looking for an elegant solution (if there is one)?
You don't need to pollute your models with XmlInclude attributes. You could explicitly indicate all known classes to the XmlSerializer's constructor:
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(obj.GetType(), new[] { typeof(Bar) });
Also using object as base class seems like a crappy approach. At least define a marker interface:
public interface IMarker
{
}
that your Bar's will implement:
public class Bar : IMarker
{
public int Arg1 { get; set; }
public double Arg2 { get; set; }
}
and then then specialize the Value1 property of your Foo class to this marker instead of making it like the most universal type in the universe (it can't be):
public class Foo
{
public IMarker Value1 { get; set; }
public string Value2 { get; set; }
}
Coz now it's pretty trivial to get all loaded types at runtime in all referenced assemblies that are implementing the marker interface and passing them to the XmlSerializer constructor:
var type = typeof(IMarker);
var types = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()
.SelectMany(s => s.GetTypes())
.Where(p != type)
.Where(p => type.IsAssignableFrom(p))
.ToArray();
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(obj.GetType(), types);
Now you've got a pretty capable XmlSerializer that will know how to properly serialize all types implementing your marker interface. You've achieved almost the same functionality as JSON.NET. And don't forget that this XmlSerializaer instantiation should reside in your Composition Root project which knows about all loaded types.
And once again using object is a poor design decision.
I need to generate an XML document that follows this specifictaion
<productName locale="en_GB">Name</productName>
but using XMLSeralization I am getting the following
<productName locale="en_GB">
<Name>Name</Name>
</productName>
My C# code is like this:
[Serializable]
public class productName
{
public productName()
{
}
public string Name;
[XmlAttribute]
public string locale;
}
XmlAttribute is what is required to show the locale in the correct place, but I am unable to figure out how to export the Name field correctly.
Does anyone have an idea?
Thanks
EDIT:
This is the code to generate the XML
public static class XMLSerialize
{
public static void SerializeToXml<T>(string file, T value)
{
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(T));
using (var writer = XmlWriter.Create(file))
serializer.Serialize(writer, value);
}
public static T DeserializeFromXML<T>(string file)
{
XmlSerializer deserializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(T));
TextReader textReader = new StreamReader(file);
T result;
result = (T)deserializer.Deserialize(textReader);
textReader.Close();
return result;
}
}
Instead of specifying Name as element specify it as text value by adding [XmlText] attribute
[XmlText]
public string Value { get; set; }
This contains not only a direct answer to your question, but more of a indirect answer of how to solve similar issues like this in the future.
Start the other way around, with your xml, write your xml exactly like you want it and go from there, like this:
// assuming data.xml contains the xml as you'd like it
> xsd.exe data.xml // will generate data.xsd, ie xsd-descriptor
> xsd.exe data.xsd /classes // will generate data.cs, ie c# classes
> notepad.exe data.cs // have a look at data.cs with your favorite editor
Now just have a look at data.cs, this will contain an enormous amount of attributes and stuff and the namespaces are probably wrong, but at least you know how to solve your particular xml-issue.
The direct answer is to use the XmlTextAttribute on the given property, preferably named Value since that is the convention I've seen so far.
[Serializable]
public class productName {
public productName() { }
[XmlText]
public string Value {get; set;}
[XmlAttribute]
public string locale {get; set;}
}
I'm quite new to XML serialization/deserialization and I'm wondering how I should apply tags (XmlElement, XmlAttribute etc) to the following objects which I'm writing to XML files, to make it most optimal for me to later use LINQ or similar to get out the data I want. Let me give an example:
[XmlRoot("Root")]
public class RootObject
{
public Services Services { get; set; }
}
public class Services
{
public Service TileMapService { get; set; }
}
public class Service
{
public string Title { get; set; }
public string href { get; set; }
}
Here I've defined some properties which I'm going to write to XML with some values I'm gonna add later. At this point, I've hardcoded in the values in this method:
public static void RootCapabilities()
{
RootObject ro = new RootObject()
{
Services = new Services()
{
TileMapService = new Service()
{
Title = "Title",
href = "http://something"
}
}
};
Which gets me this XML output:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Root xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<Services>
<TileMapService>
<Title>Title</Title>
<href>http://something</href>
</TileMapService>
</Services>
</Root>
My question is if this is a valid way of doing it or if I have to use the 'XmlElement' and 'XmlAttribute' tags to later deserialize this XML file and get the information out of it, that I want (for example 'title').
I haven't been sure how to write this question, so please let me know if it's too vague.
I would not use XML serialization if I were you. Any changes to your schema/object structure and you immediately lose backwards compatibility due to how XML serialization works as a technology.
Rather separate out the XML serialization from the actual class structure - this way you can make changes to the XML/object schema and write proper migrating functions to handle any changes you make in the future.
Rather use the LINQ-to-XML classes to construct your XML document and save it as they are the easiest way in .NET to convert object structures to XML in a decoupled manner.
if the output is what you expect I think that you shouldn't change anything.
You should use Decorators like XmlAttribute or XmlIgnore when you want change the default behavior (e.g don't include a field, include one field as an attribute...)
Their role is obtain full control of the serialization and avoid unexpected behaviors
If you don't want to worry about the nitty-gritty of the serialization, XmlSerializer has always treated me well.
public static void SerializeObject(T obj, string file)
{
XmlSerializer s = new XmlSerializer(typeof(T));
TextWriter w = new StreamWriter(file);
s.Serialize(w, obj);
w.Close();
}
public static T DeserializeObject(string file)
{
XmlSerializer s = new XmlSerializer(typeof(T));
using (StreamReader r = new StreamReader(file))
{
return (T)s.Deserialize(r);
}
}
This should really only be used with references types though (objects, not primitive types or structs). Deserialize can return null and casting that to a value type will bring nothing but heartache.
I hope to find a solution from you. What I need is to serialize ValidatorList class object into an xml document. How to do this?
I tried like this:
XmlSerializer _serializer = new XmlSerializer(list);
But I don't know how to make output of xml for list that has several classes.
C#
_list= new ListVal();
Type _type = typeof(ras);
_list.Add(new RequiredField
{
Property = _type.GetProperty("CustRef")
}.Add(new AsciiVal()));
_list.Add(new RequiredField
{
Property = _type.GetProperty("ctr")
}.Add(new StringLengthVal
{
min= 3,
max= 3
}));
[Serializable]
public class Field
{
public Field Next
{
get;
set;
}
public Field TypeName
{
get;
set;
}
public Field PropertyName
{
get;
set;
}
}
public class RequiredField : Field
{
//TODO
}
public class AsciiVal: Field
{
//TODO
}
public class StringLengthVal: Field
{
//TODO
}
public class ListVal: List<Field>
{
//TODO
}
I have something close, but not exactly the Xml you want. In actual fact I think you'll see that the Xml produced below makes a bit more sense than what you have.
To get you started, you control the serialization and deserialization using attributes in the System.Xml.Serialization namespace. A few useful ones to read up on are
XmlRootAttribute
XmlElementAttribute
XmlAttributeAttribute
XmlIncludeAttribute
So I mocked up some code which closely matches your own. Notice the addition of some attributes to instruct the serializer how I want the Xml to be laid out.
[XmlInclude(typeof(AsciiValidator))]
[XmlInclude(typeof(RequiredValidator))]
[XmlInclude(typeof(StringLengthValidator))]
public class FieldValidator
{
[XmlElement("Next")]
public FieldValidator Next
{
get;
set;
}
[XmlElement("PropertyName")]
public string PropertyName
{
get;
set;
}
}
public class AsciiValidator: FieldValidator
{
}
public class RequiredValidator: FieldValidator
{
}
public class StringLengthValidator: FieldValidator
{
[XmlElement]
public int MinLength{get;set;}
[XmlElement]
public int MaxLength{get;set;}
}
[XmlRoot("ValidatorList")]
public class ValidatorList : List<FieldValidator>
{
}
Point of interest; Every class inheriting FieldValidator must be added to the list of known types using XmlIncludeAttribute so the serializer knows what to do with them)
Then I created an example object map:
var test = new ValidatorList();
test.Add(
new RequiredValidator()
{
PropertyName="CustRef",
Next = new AsciiValidator()
});
test.Add(
new RequiredValidator()
{
PropertyName="CurrencyIndicator",
Next = new StringLengthValidator(){
MinLength=3,
MaxLength = 10
}
});
Finally I told the serializer to serialize it (and output the result to the console)
var ser = new XmlSerializer(typeof(ValidatorList));
ser.Serialize(Console.Out,test);
This was the result:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<ValidatorList xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<FieldValidator xsi:type="RequiredValidator">
<Next xsi:type="AsciiValidator" />
<PropertyName>CustRef</PropertyName>
</FieldValidator>
<FieldValidator xsi:type="RequiredValidator">
<Next xsi:type="StringLengthValidator">
<MinLength>3</MinLength>
<MaxLength>10</MaxLength>
</Next>
<PropertyName>CurrencyIndicator</PropertyName>
</FieldValidator>
</ValidatorList>
Not a million miles away from what you wanted. There is the need to output certain things in a certain way (eg xsi:type tells the serializer how to deserialize back to the object map). I hope this gives you a good start.
Here is a live, working example: http://rextester.com/OXPOB95358
Deserialization can be done by calling the Deserialize method on the XmlSerializer.
For example, if your xml is in a string:
var ser = new XmlSerializer(typeof(ValidatorList));
var test = "<..../>" // Your Xml
var xmlReader = XmlReader.Create(new StringReader(test));
var validatorList = (ValidatorList)ser.Deserialize(xmlReader);
There are many overrides of Deserialize which take differing inputs depending if the data is in a Stream an existing reader, or saved to a file.
You have to decorate the class that contains the _validators field with the KonwnType attribute
[Serializable]
[KwownType(typeof(RequiredFieldValidator)]
[KwownType(typeof(AsciValidator)]
public class MySerialisableClass
I have several SO answers that detail how to serialize objects using XML. I'll provide links below.
However, since you're looking for a rather simple serialization of your object, you may want to read up on the DataContractSerializer. It's much less complicated than the old .NET 1.x XML Serialization.
Here's the list of SO answers:
Omitting all xsi and xsd namespaces when serializing an object in .NET?
XmlSerializer: remove unnecessary xsi and xsd namespaces
Suppress xsi:nil but still show Empty Element when Serializing in .Net
Using XmlAttributeOverrides on Nested Properties
Even though many of these have to do with XML serialization and namespaces, they contain complete examples of serializing an object to XML using .NET 1.x XML Serialization.
I am using C# + VSTS2008 + .Net 3.0 to do XML serialization. The code works fine. Here below is my code and current serialized XML results.
Now I want to add two additional layers to the output XML file. Here is my expected XML results. Any easy way to do this? I am not sure whether NestingLevel could help to do this. I want to find an easy way which does not change the structure of MyClass and MyObject.
Expected XML serialization result,
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<MyClass xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<MyObjectProperty>
<AdditionalLayer1>
<AdditionalLayer2>
<ObjectName>Foo</ObjectName>
</AdditionalLayer1>
</AdditionalLayer2>
</MyObjectProperty>
</MyClass>
Current XML serialization result,
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<MyClass xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<MyObjectProperty>
<ObjectName>Foo</ObjectName>
</MyObjectProperty>
</MyClass>
My current code,
public class MyClass
{
public MyObject MyObjectProperty;
}
public class MyObject
{
public string ObjectName;
}
public class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
XmlSerializer s = new XmlSerializer(typeof(MyClass));
FileStream fs = new FileStream("foo.xml", FileMode.Create);
MyClass instance = new MyClass();
instance.MyObjectProperty = new MyObject();
instance.MyObjectProperty.ObjectName = "Foo";
s.Serialize(fs, instance);
return;
}
}
I want to find an easy way which does not change the structure of MyClass and MyObject.
Frankly, that isn't going to happen. XmlSerializer (when used simply) follows the structure of the classes / members. So you can't add extra layers without changing the structure.
When used in a bespoke way (IXmlSerializable), the one thing you can say for sure is that it isn't simple... this is not a fun interface to implement.
My advice: introduce a DTO that mimics your desired format, and shim to that before you serialize.
Why do you need these additional two layers?
Is its a business requirement, you should add these two objects to your object model:
public class MyClass
{
public AdditionalLayer1 AdditionalLayer1;
}
public class AdditionalLayer1
{
public AdditionalLayer2 AdditionalLayer2;
}
public class AdditionalLayer2
{
public MyObject MyObjectProperty;
}
public class MyObject
{
public string ObjectName;
}
if its purely because of some compatibility requirements you can either do the thing above, or implement IXmlSerializable on MyClass:
public class MyClass : IXmlSerializable
{
public MyObject MyObjectProperty;
public void WriteXml (XmlWriter writer)
{
//open the two layers
//serialize MyObject
//close the two layers
}
public void ReadXml (XmlReader reader)
{
//read all the layers back, etc
}
public XmlSchema GetSchema()
{
return(null);
}
}
You could do a transformation with XSL after serializing and add the "missing" tags.
I would suggest serializing out to a MemoryStream instead of a FileStream and then loading the XML into an XmlDocument, then using the methods of that class to insert the extra nodes you want. After that, you can save it out.
I did exactly this only recently and didn't find overriding the IXmlSerializable interface at all difficult or complicated. Serialize/deserialize as normal but for the class that contains the sub-class which you need to wrap in extra tags derive from IXmlSerializable:
class ContainingClass : IXmlSerializable
{
...
#region IXmlSerializable Members
public XmlSchema GetSchema()
{
return null;
}
public void ReadXml(XmlReader reader)
{
**reader.ReadStartElement("Equipment");**
XmlSerializer ser = new XmlSerializer(typeof(Host));
while (reader.NodeType != XmlNodeType.EndElement)
{
Host newHost = new Host();
newHost.Name = (string) ser.Deserialize(reader);
_hosts.Add(newHost);
reader.Read();
}
// Read the node to its end.
// Next call of the reader methods will crash if not called.
**reader.ReadEndElement(); // "Equipment"**
}
public void WriteXml(XmlWriter writer)
{
XmlSerializer ser = new XmlSerializer(typeof(Host));
**writer.WriteStartElement("Equipment");**
foreach (Host host in this._hosts)
{
ser.Serialize(writer, host);
}
**writer.WriteEndElement();**
}
#endregion
All I do here is to wrap the de/serialization of the lower level objects. Here I'm wrapping an extra tag "Equipment" around all the Hosts in a collection in this class. You could add as many tags as you like here as long as you close each one you start.
NOTE: Bold is showing as ** text ** - just make sure you get rid of the double asterisks :)