To add a litte thing, public AxisService(WSDLService service) is wrong, as we have a choice of Endpoints at that point it should be
public AxisService(WSDLEndPoint wsdlendpoint), and I am start to think that we should have public AxisServiceGroup(WSDLService service) thoughts? Srinath On 12/6/05, Chathura Herath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 >
