@Tim
If you follow what i said in a first email on how to properly map an
array bean (Bean[]) in the Bean. The explicit type mapping in the WSDD
doesn't appear the next time.
I am using Axis web service with that options :
provider=java:RPC style=wrapped use=literal
Sebastien
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:45:31 -0800, Tim K. (Gmane) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, it worked without doing anything special for the array.
The extra classes are included in the wsdd and it works, but if a Bean[]
appears explicitly as an argument of a method there's also an explictit
type mapping in the wsdd for the Bean[], but not when using
--extraClasses. It works, but I am curios why the difference.
Thanks for your tip.
Tim
Sebastien Mayemba Mbokoso wrote:
I think u don't need to include anything special for your arrays.
Generate all your stubs with the task WSDL2Java and look at in the
deploy.wsdd if the extra classes are mapped.
-
Sebastien
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:12:53 -0800, Tim K. (Gmane) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, I do. Ah, I missed the --extraClasses option ...
Do I need to also include anything special for the arrays to work (e.g.a
B[] in addition to B)?
Thanks.
Tim
Sebastien Mayemba Mbokoso wrote:
Do you know all the object types of 'Object o' at run-time ? If you do
maybe you can use
Java2WSDL with that more option : --extraClasses ?
---
Sebastien
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:20:24 -0800, Tim K. (Gmane) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello,
Using java2wsdl to generate the WSDL from java server side classes, how
can I force the registration of a serializer/deserializer for a bean
that does not appear directly in the method arguments, e.g.:
public A foo(A a)
where A is a bean which can contain another bean B and also a bean array
B[] but it's not typed (e.g. it's defined as an Object):
A
{
...
Object o; // At run-time this can be B, B[] or other things.
...
}
The problem is that at run-time the server complains that there is no
deserializer for B which makes sense because java2wsdl has never seen B
anywhere in the method signatures.
The work-around so far has been to add a dummy method that has both B
and B[] as arguments, but there's gotta be a nicer way to do it.
Thank you for your help.
--
Tim
