[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12835540#action_12835540
]
Dennis Sosnoski commented on CXF-2680:
--------------------------------------
Though I now see that WS-I BP references yet another version of the WSDL 1.1
schema: http://ws-i.org/profiles/basic/1.1/wsdl-2004-08-24.xsd It might be
worth switching to that one, since it looks like it includes more fixes.
> wsdlvalidator ignores WSDL constraints on element order
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CXF-2680
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2680
> Project: CXF
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Tooling
> Affects Versions: 2.2.5
> Reporter: Dennis Sosnoski
> Attachments: library-plain.wsdl
>
>
> When running WSDLToJava with the -validate flag a WSDL with elements in
> incorrect order is accepted without complaint. In the example tested, the
> wsdl:service element precedes the wsdl:types element. This is a violation of
> the WSDL 1.1 schema definition, which defines the wsdl:definitions element
> structure as:
> <complexType name="definitionsType">
> <complexContent>
> <extension base="wsdl:documented">
> <sequence>
> <element ref="wsdl:import" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <element ref="wsdl:types" minOccurs="0"/>
> <element ref="wsdl:message" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <element ref="wsdl:portType" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <element ref="wsdl:binding" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <element ref="wsdl:service" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <any namespace="##other" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
> <annotation>
> <documentation>to support extensibility elements
> </documentation>
> </annotation>
> </any>
> </sequence>
> <attribute name="targetNamespace" type="uriReference"
> use="optional"/>
> <attribute name="name" type="NMTOKEN" use="optional"/>
> </extension>
> </complexContent>
> </complexType>
> If there's going to be a -validate flag it should perform a proper validation
> of the WSDL. I realize it's common for implementations to accept invalid WSDL
> of this type, but there should at least be a warning generated so that users
> will realize their WSDL is not actually valid.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
