Quick question: Are those elements "top level" elements or do they just occur inside other structures (like xsd:sequence/xsd:choice)?
It it's the former, then they are NOT supposed to have minOccurs/maxOccurs constraints at all. Both should actually be dropped. If you check section 3.3.2 of the XmlSchema spec of "Part 1: Structures", global scoped elements should not have minOccurs/maxOccurs. They are only valid on element defs used as particals (aka: in a seq/choice). If they are being discard when used as a partical, that's definitely a problem. Any chance you can create a small test case that shows the problem? Most likely, it's an XmlSchema issue. :-( Also, what version of CXF are you using? 2.0.4? 2.1 snapshot? Dan On Thursday 28 February 2008, Matthias Karlsson wrote: > Hi, > > I'm experiencing a rather strange problem using the latest version of > CXF. I'm creating a web service by generating code from a hand-written > WSDL which works fine in all our tests, but now we have received a > notification from one of our customers that the WSDL that is outputted > does not appear to be correct. > > Example: > > <xsd:element name="company" maxOccurs="unbounded" minOccurs="0"> > <xsd:complexType> > <xsd:sequence> > <xsd:element name="name" type="xsd:string"/> > <xsd:element name="category" type="xsd:string"/> > </xsd:sequence> > </xsd:complexType> > </xsd:element> > > This is an example of a declared element that has a sequence (= is > implemented as a list in the generated code). It has minOccurs="0" > specified, but when I append ?wsdl to the web service to get its WSDL, > I notice that this attribute as been removed. That is, it is identical > to the element above, save for minOccurs="0". > > This is not an isolated case, but all of our elements specified in > this way "suffer" from this. > > At first, I figured it didn't matter because minOccurs="0" might be > the default value anyway, but after checking the specification it > seems like both minOccurs and maxOccurs has a default value of 1, > which means that the generated service is not identical to the WSDL I > generated from. > > Now, I have successfully verified that I *can* send a list with zero > entries so I know that CXF regards the list as being from 0 to > unbounded internally, but seeing as the specification says 1 is > default, I have to assume that depending on the framework you are > using to generate access code, it is very much possible that code is > generated that refuse to validate without at least one entry. > > Without going into more detail than this, has anyone else experienced > this? Am I wrong in regard to the specification, or did I perhaps > declare the element wrong in the WSDL? > > Thanks in advance, > Matthias Karlsson -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer, IONA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
