DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13038>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13038 WSIF's dynamic port/operation creation confusion about message names Summary: WSIF's dynamic port/operation creation confusion about message names Product: Axis Version: 1.0-rc1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: Other Component: Basic Architecture AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using the 9/26/2002 nightly build of wsif, and running the attached test program, an error occurs creating a port Exception in thread "main" org.apache.wsif.WSIFException: missing required in WSDL 1.1 binding operation for getNucSeq at org.apache.wsif.providers.soap.apacheaxis.WSIFPort_ApacheAxis.<init> (Unknown Source) at org.apache.wsif.providers.soap.apacheaxis.WSIFDynamicProvider_ApacheAxis.createD ynamicWSIFPort(Unknown Source ) at org.apache.wsif.base.WSIFServiceImpl.createDynamicWSIFPort(Unknown Source) at org.apache.wsif.base.WSIFServiceImpl.getPort(Unknown Source) at org.apache.wsif.base.WSIFServiceImpl.getPort(Unknown Source) at TestWSDLMessageNaming.main(TestWSDLMessageNaming.java:55) The problem is associated with this line of the WSDL file http://www.ebi.ac.uk/xembl/XEMBL.wsdl found at the xpath /definitions/portType/operation/ <input message="tns:getNucSeqRequest" name="getNucSeq" /> since when I replace that line by <input message="tns:getNucSeqRequest" name="getNucSeqRequest" /> the code works fine. It appears that something is getting confused about the message and name attributes of input and how they should be used since everything works when the two are the same. From my reading of the WSDL spec, the WSDL file appears ok, but I could be wrong. I first mentioned this problem in connection with the 9/4/2002 nightly build of wsif, but in that version, the failure occurred in createOperation (the last line of the test program). In the current version, it occurs much earlier, presumably in generating the list of operations available on the port.
