Hi
Okay, thanks.
No particular opinion about the WSDL pruning proposal then?
IMHO it makes sense. If the endpoint exposes only one of many services described in a wsdl there seems to be no need in keeping the
rest of them in a published wsdl. That said it might be a bit expensive to ensure the 'unused' services are stripped.
Is there any other reason in yourself being proposing it, other thna in a published wsdl be verbose ? Say, a client code has issues
figuring out which service definition to use or something like that ?
One possible complication here is that one service might return references to transient services also defined in this wsdl. Say,
Bank return WSA refs to Account services. There might be no direct link between these 2 services at a wsdl level so if a Bank
endpoint is published and its published wsdl instance won't contain a definition for Account then it might cause some issues at a
point when Account reference is used at a client side ? I'm not sure if it actually will, but it's something which may need to be
looked at...
Cheers, Sergey
Andrew.
Andi Abes wrote:
The soapAction is the logical name of the operation - so CXF is very
correct in not touching it.
A good practice is not to use hostnames for it, but rather URI's that
represent the logical purpose of the operation.
The soap:address is obviously used to connect to the service, hence it
must be updated.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Clegg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 6:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Proposal -- removing irrelevent services from WSDL
Hey folks,
I have a WSDL-first project which contains several service
definitions,
each
with a separate binding to a separate port type.
When I go to the 'services' page for the WAR in Tomcat, I get a bunch
of
links like:
http://myserver:8080/MyWar/services/ServiceOne?wsdl
http://myserver:8080/MyWar/services/ServiceTwo?wsdl
etc.
Exactly the same WSDL, but published to different URLs.
What would be really neat is if CXF could trim out the unused
services,
bindings and port type definitions when it publishes the WSDL.
I know it already does some editing as the soap:address location
attributes
are correct. Would the maintainers be interested in a patch to do this
if
I
volunteered? I *think* Axis2 does this, if I remember correctly, so
there
might be some usable code in there.
Interestingly, I just noticed the soap:operation soapAction attributes
are
not updated the same way as soap:address is. They still have the
localhost
test URLs which I hardcoded into my WSDL. Is this intentional, or a
bug,
or
a sign I've misconfigured something? (Does anything even use this?)
Andrew.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Proposal----removing-
irrelevent-services-from-WSDL-tp20359717p20359717.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Proposal----removing-irrelevent-services-from-WSDL-tp20359717p20376006.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
