Dan,
  I am wondering how you got the test case for exception to work if the SOAP
messages are qualified but WSDL is unqualified. I believe that was the
problem with my case also and the exception test case failed.  

FYI, I am still working on 2.0.3. Are you running these test cases for
exception on 2.0.3 or 2.0.4 snapshot? 
I noticed that in <runDocLitTest> you have a catch statement for
CustomException. In my case its always something like
CustomException_Exception because WSDL2Java generates this wrapper. Does
2.0.4 get rid off the wrapper exception class?

I am going to give 2.0.4 a try today in the evening. Also, is the tentative
release date around mid Jan? 

- Kannan


dkulp wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe not.   I did wireshark wiretraces on the messages and the messages
> are in qualified form despite the schema saying they should be
> unqualified.    That's definitely a bug and may be part of the issue.  :-(
> 
> I'll try and get that fixed and see if that helps.   Might not be able to
> get to it till monday though.  Silly meetings. 
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>> I'm definitely going to need a test case from you.   I've checked the
>> system tests that we currently have and they are all using the default
>> unqualified schemas.   In particular, I looked at the
>> CustomException.java thing that we throw (code at:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cxf/trunk/systests/src/test/
>>java/org/apache/cxf/systest/jaxws/CustomException.java
>>
>> and the Schema it generates is definitely unqualified and the
>> exception test does work.   (Line 360 of ClientServerMiscTest.java)
>>
>> Could you please send me the exception class you are trying to throw
>> so I can try and reproduce it?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Dan
>>
>> On Friday 11 January 2008, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>> > The stuff in CXF-1226 is new for 2.0.4 so you would need to be using
>> > a snapshot version of 2.0.4 for that to work.   I'm looking into the
>> > other stuff now.
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> > On Friday 11 January 2008, rkannan wrote:
>> > > Dan,
>> > >   I followed the discussion on CXF-1226 in this forum and found it
>> > > very helpful.
>> > > (http://www.nabble.com/Created:-(CXF-1226)-Missing-input-output-pa
>> > >ra m- namespace-in-SOAP-td13870857.html)
>> > >
>> > >   The workaround proposed by Benson is creating a qualified schema
>> > > and fixing the NULL field problem. I tried the
>> > > ReflectionServiceFactoryBean approach that you had suggested but I
>> > > couldn't get it working. You had mentioned that it was not very
>> > > well tested at that time. It will be cleaner to use a spring
>> > > configuration rather than create package-info files and dummy
>> > > beans. Do have any update on its status?
>> > >
>> > > - Kannan
>> > >
>> > > rkannan wrote:
>> > > > Dan,
>> > > >   Sorry, I made a mistake in my previous post. There is nothing
>> > > > wrong with parsing the SOAP detail. However the problem is with
>> > > > the Unmarshaller piece. As you said I wrote a simple HelloWorld
>> > > > program that throws an exception and this is what I found out.
>> > > >
>> > > > - HelloWorld program is working fine for exception. The reason
>> > > > is that the generated WSDL has elementFormDefault=qualified on
>> > > > its schema. As a result, WSDL2Java generates stub code that has
>> > > > @XmlElement annotation with namespace attribute on the protected
>> > > > field of exception class. I checked to see what happens when
>> > > > elementFormDefault is set to unqualified in WSDL. The generated
>> > > > stub code does not have namespace atttribute in @XmElement
>> > > > annotation. In this case the fields of exception object are all
>> > > > null (my original post talks about this problem). I believe
>> > > > while unmarshalling the fault message, the namespace attribute
>> > > > in SOAP fault message is compared with the annotation and it
>> > > > fails here. When you said its working fine with your sample
>> > > > program, I assume its because of qualified schema. Can you check
>> > > > if it works fine with unqualified also?
>> > > >
>> > > > - Having figured this, I decided to generate the WSDL of my
>> > > > original problem with elementFormDefault set to qualified. I
>> > > > followed the instruction in this post:
>> > > > http://www.nabble.com/xs%3Aschema-attributeFormDefault%3D%22unqu
>> > > >al if
>> > > > ied%22-elementFormDefault%3D%22unqualified%22-td13604195.html#a1
>> > > >36 209 04 But I am not able to get it to work. There is no change
>> > > > in the WSDL.
>> > > >
>> > > > What is the correct way to get this problem resolved? Using
>> > > > <qualified> in WSDL (if so how?), or is there a bug. Because
>> > > > even with unqualified schema, unmarhsalling happens fine for
>> > > > SOAP request/response messages other than fault messages.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Kannan
>> > > >
>> > > > dkulp wrote:
>> > > >> Kannan,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Any chance you could come up with an example so I can see what
>> > > >> the issue is in a debugger?   A modified hello world or
>> > > >> something would be great. The samples that I've written seem to
>> > > >> be OK.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Dan
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thursday 10 January 2008, rkannan wrote:
>> > > >>> I did some debugging of the CXF code and figured the
>> > > >>> following: There is a call to a method in StaxUtils that
>> > > >>> parses the SOAP fault response. It correctly identifies values
>> > > >>> for all headers except <detail>. As a result a NULL value is
>> > > >>> returned for fault detail; the created exception object
>> > > >>> therefore has its member variables uninitialized. This could
>> > > >>> be a bug in CXF. Maybe we need to include some jar file that
>> > > >>> has correct implementation for parsing the SOAP fault. This is
>> > > >>> a serious block.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> - Kannan
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> rkannan wrote:
>> > > >>> > I am throwing an exception from server side but on the
>> > > >>> > client side the exception object has all the fields set to
>> > > >>> > NULL. I checked the incoming SOAP fault message and it has
>> > > >>> > correct values for the fields. I believe the correct jar
>> > > >>> > files are not being used because I had a similar problem in
>> > > >>> > sending List data types as parameters and it was fixed by
>> > > >>> > adding asm.jar. I am using Wrapped Doc/Lit with the
>> > > >>> > following dependencies on client:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >>> >-- -- ---- ------------------------------ <dependency>
>> > > >>> >             <groupId>junit</groupId>
>> > > >>> >             <artifactId>junit</artifactId>
>> > > >>> >             <version>4.1</version>
>> > > >>> >             <scope>provided</scope>
>> > > >>> >         </dependency>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >     <dependency>
>> > > >>> >             <groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
>> > > >>> >             <artifactId>cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws</artifactId>
>> > > >>> >             <version>${cxf.version}</version>
>> > > >>> >         </dependency>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >    <dependency>
>> > > >>> >             <groupId>org.apache.cxf</groupId>
>> > > >>> >             <artifactId>cxf-rt-transports-http</artifactId>
>> > > >>> >             <version>${cxf.version}</version>
>> > > >>> >         </dependency>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >    <dependency>
>> > > >>> >             <groupId>asm</groupId>
>> > > >>> >             <artifactId>asm</artifactId>
>> > > >>> >             <version>3.0</version>
>> > > >>> >         </dependency>
>> > > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >>> >-- -- ---- ------------------------------
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > If it really is a problem with using the correct jar files,
>> > > >>> > it will be very helpful to get a list of jars that need to
>> > > >>> > be used on server and client side to enable web service
>> > > >>> > using CXF. I read the <WHICH_JARS> file that is part of CXF
>> > > >>> > download, but adding them has not solved my problem. Can
>> > > >>> > someone point out which classes are absolutely needed to
>> > > >>> > handle fault/exception objects properly?
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > Thanks,
>> > > >>> > Kannan
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --
>> > > >> J. Daniel Kulp
>> > > >> Principal Engineer, IONA
>> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > >> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer, IONA
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Exception-object-has-all-fields-set-to-NULL-on-client-side-tp14723440p14764053.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to