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=15533>. 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=15533 Java types not generated if opertion name matches element name [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-12-19 17:57 ------- I agree that having two beans per-operation would not be ideal :-) "No. JAX-RPC dictates that we recognized this pattern." You mean the spec. right? I didn't realise that. "Our original intent was to work in mix-and-match mode, but we haven't been diligent in preserving that, so it doesn't surprise me that it might not work. HOWEVER, it is common practice to follow ONE mode throughout a WSDL file. In fact, I believe WS-I is advocating that thou shalt not mix-and-match." I agree that it would be very confusing to have multiple modes in the same WSDL and I would certainly never advocate this. But I could easily imagine a scenario where this would happen. I happened by this because I'd created a WSDL from an installed Axis service and then extended it myself. The generated WSDL was 'wrapped' my WSDL was unwrapped. "If you still think we should fix the mix-and-match failure, feel free to reopen this bug, but don't expect any action on this soon (not from me, anyway - Tom?). My personal position is that if you mix-and-match, you should use the --noWrapped flag." I will re-open it and I won't expect action :-) but at least people will be aware of the issue. Again I agree that mix'n'match would be stupid. Thanks for your time
