I > Sure :) ... how about because it was *never* used as the relevant WSDL > component? Other than that, there's a mismatch too .. we currently tag > AxisService as implementing WSDLService. But that's not really true - an > AxisService represents the entire service, not just the <service> > element.
It represents the component not the element. So its little bit more that the infoset element. On the otherhand the AxisOperation do have a way of > OTOH AxisOperation may have info that may have come from both > portType/operation and binding/operation .. so its not a perfect match, This is all true and legitimate but the selection was a compromise and at the time of the writing it was > > Also, we created WOM as a start towards a WSDL2 component model. > Unfortunately Woden didn't take over and use that stuff .. so right now > WOM works as a WSDL representation which is independent of WSDL 1.1 and > WSDL 2.0. We could in theory remove WOM IMO but it'll require a huge > amount of work because even the codegen stuff uses it heavily. So I'm > not for doing that work now .. its a potential refactoring that could be > considered after Woden ships and we really have 2 true WSDL models > available to deal with. > > What are the arguments for keeping it? > > Sanjiva. > > > -- Chathura Herath http://www.bloglines.com/blog/chathurah
