I would like to just summarize, the current functionality used to resolve
WSDL and XSD's using
WSDLResolver and XSDResolver and see how we want to handle the situation
further.

In case of WSDL we have two approaches that are currently used....
a) For the WSDL that's been specified in the SCDL file we use the SCA
resolution mechanism always.
b) For the WSDL imports using @wsdlLocation attribute, we now use the
non-SCA mechanism as
the first preferred approach to identify the artifacts, if the artifact is
not found using the non-SCA mechanism then
we try to use the SCA mechanism to resolve the artifacts.

Similarly, in case of XSD we have two approaches again....
a) For inline XSD's we use the SCA resolution mechanism always.
b) For XSD imports using @schemaLocation attribute, we use the non-SCA
mechanism as the preferred
first approach and use the SCA mechanism if its not resolved with the
non-SCA mechanism.

The reason, why I had to revert some changes in XSDResolver is for the
reason that I had accidentally made the inline schemas
to follow the norms of using non-SCA mechanism as first approach, which is
invalid and had to revert the code and keep these norms only
for XSD imports.

The XSDResolver allows us to specify absolutePath's and URL's in the
@schemaLocation attribute and resolves them accordingly.
But same is not the case with WSDL @wsdlLocation attribute, were only
relativePaths are allowed to resolve even with the
non-SCA mechanism.

My question here is that, are we also expecting the WSDL @wsdlLocation
attribute to support absolutePath's.

-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam

Reply via email to