In fact, it's in two parts :
1/ using a WSDL endpoint property to expose a WSDL can be interesting to use a 
BC
directly with a SE supporting WSDL (for example, directly use a HTTP publishing 
a
smpp WSDL).
2/ currently, BC uses "internal" format. For example, for the SMPP component,
Lars has defined a XML format looking like this :
<message>
  <source>+336123456</source>
  <destination>+336654321</destination>
  <ton>INTERNATIONAL</ton>
  <npi>NATIONAL</npi>
  <text>The SMS content</text>
</message>
If I need to use the SMPP, another SU must "format" the target message (the
NormalizedMessage content) into the format expected by the SMPP one.
Maybe it can be interesting to define a XSD (BC global or by components group)
and linked util class to normalize the format of messages content. Or, in place
of a XSD, define a kind of standard WSDL for BCs.
I hope I'm clear :)

Maybe this kind of stuff already exists and, if it's the case, accept my 
apologize :)

Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
BuildProcess/AutoDeploy Project Leader
http://buildprocess.sourceforge.net

On Tue 27/01/09 13:07, "Guillaume Nodet" [email protected] wrote:
> Are you thinking about just exposing a WSDL service, or more like full
> soap support on file / ftp and other protocols ?
> 
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 13:17,  <[email protected]
> et> wrote:
> Hi all,
> >
> > Implementing the SMPP component, I have think about
> the WSDL support.
>
> > Currently, some binding components don't support
> WSDL (the endpoint descriptor is empty). It's the case for file, ftp, xmpp
> and smpp components for
> example.
> >
> > Adding a WSDL property on these endpoints can be
> great and we will be able to store a SOAP envlope in a flat file (for
> example) and send directly to
> a WSDL compliant service engine (such as
> CXF-SE).
>
> > What do you think about this ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
> 
> 


Reply via email to