Hi > 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. Its not an element, its a component and From WSDLService you can navigate to the operations.
> OTOH AxisOperation may have info that may have come from both > portType/operation and binding/operation .. so its not a perfect match, True. It might not have been used for its fullest potential (i. e. the replaced by woden). But one other reason why we extend it is because it allows us to get rid of duplicate object trees. One at the WOM level and another at the configuration hierarchy level, and one tree is pointing to other from here and there. May be i am wrong but I still do not see extra advantage of this delegation. Chathura P.S. Anyway if there is no objection i would like to see the delegation happen at the interface level, rather than in implementation level. It makes things consistant. public AxisService(WSDLServiceImpl serviceImpl) --> public AxisService(WSDLService service) -- Chathura Herath http://www.bloglines.com/blog/chathurah
