Hi Bill, Currently whenever there is a name conflict in schema elements, they will be named with a post fix. And in the headers we should show the namespaces, so the developers will be able to figure out the right element.
Thanks Dimuthu On Nov 21, 2007 8:16 AM, Bill Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If I understand your reference to the absence of namespaces in my example, > Dimuthu, you are correct to identify that as a distinct but similar name > uniqueness issue. Certainly the WSDL itself could contain name conflicts > that are resolved through the use of distinct namespaces. So, where I > wrote > "axis2_stub_start_op_servicename_opname", in the general case that would > need to be "axis2_stub_start_op_ns1_servicename_ns2_opname". This could > certainly be remedied as part of the same project. In the simple case > where > all the user names are part of the same namespace, one could default to > the > status quo and leave these out. To handle the general case, one could use > the -N command line argument to WSDL2Java for the similar purpose here. > This would allow the WSDL2C user to determine the prefix to be used for > each > namespace. The important part to avoid name conflicts, similar to the > other > situations I raised, is that every element always be generated or never > generated. In a situation where namespace identifiers are included, they > need to be included everywhere to guarantee that a namespace identifier in > one place is not confused with the same string that is part of a user name > in another place. > > And, of course, the other important part is the suggestion I made below, > that all parts of the Axis generated name precede any parts of the user > name, and no Axis string prefix be the leading substring of another Axis > generated string prefix. > > I made my suggestion for an option to preserve the status quo only to > handle > the case where you folks think there is enough installed base and the > change > is awkward enough to demand it. I personally don't have a strong opinion > one way or the other on compatibility with the status quo. > > Thanks, > Bill > > > Hi Bill, > So briefly your suggestion is, > For wsdl operations in the stub, > axis2_stub_servicename_opname should be replaced with > axis2_stub_op_servicename_opname. > axis2_stub_servicename_opname_start should be replaced with > axis2_stub_start_op_servicename_opname. > > and for consistency non wsdl-operations in the stub, > axis2_stub_servicename_create should be replaced with > axis2_stub_create_servicename. > > The only issue against this suggestion is, there the namespace part of the > operation is not prefixed. But we can just forget that, if this solves > all > the problems. > > Anyway I doubt whether we can provide the old functions with a user > option, > since it need to add some code to the java tool (code portions not > specific > to c codegeneration), But we can give a try. > > I will let devs know this discussion and ask their suggestions. > > Thanks > Dimuthu > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/WSDL2C-create-function-conflicts-with-SOAP-operation-named-create-tf4818227.html#a13870069 > Sent from the Axis - C++ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
