I have noticed that the newest code from cvs generates a port type interface using the wsdl:portType name when rpc/encoded is used, but if doc/literal is used the wsdl:binding name is used. Is there any particular design rationale behind this? I think it seems to break the idea of not exposing the fact that doc/literal is used to the client or to the service implementer. Besides that it seems like this interface should not have any knowledge about the binding, so it seems strange that it uses the name of the binding in its own name in the doc/literal approach. Any thoughts about this?
/Thomas
