Hmm... Well Axis2 does not have the capability to do rpc/encoded so unfortunately that is not an option. However it seems to me that you are seeing three methods because of the three bindings ! (Since we have no idea of how the PHP client works this is just a thought)
May be you can try using a modified WSDL with the SOAP 1.2 and HTTP bindings removed. Ajith On 3/23/07, Tim Koop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for your analysis, Ajith. To answer your question about the errors I see, I don't exactly see errors; it just looks like it isn't working the way SOAP is supposed to work. I can find these three problems using the PHP client with Axis2. Using it with Axis1 all works normal and good. 1. To get the response, I have to use $client->greeting()->return instead of just $client->greeting(). 2. When I list all the functions of this service with $client->__getFunctions(), it lists three of them for some reason (and with a complex return type) greetingResponse greeting() greetingResponse greeting() greetingResponse greeting() instead of the one when I use Axis1. string greeting() 3. If I had a function that required arguments, I would have to call it like this: $client->add(array(param0=>3, param1=>5)) instead of the normal way like this with Axis1: $client->add(3, 5) Thank you to everyone who has commented so far, and thanks for any more ideas. (Is there some way to tell Axis2 to use rpc-encoded binding? It sounds like that might solve it.) Tim Koop Ajith Ranabahu wrote: > Hi, > It seems to me that this may be an issue with the PHP client. Here is > what I gather from the information > > 1. The Axis1 WSDL has a rpc-encoded binding > 2. The Axis2 WSDL has doc/lit bindings for both SOAP 1.1 and 1.2 > 3. The requests and responses (according to their WSDL's) seem to be > correct in both cases. From the looks of it even the response from > Axis2 server seems to agree with the schema that the WSDL refers to. > > I have a feeling this could be the PHP client that fails to parse the > response (However the SOAP request has been formed correctly which > makes me doubt my conclusion). What kind of error are you seeing ? > > Ajith > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Ajith Ranabahu --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
