Re: MTOM attachments question

2008-02-25 Thread Daniel Kulp
On Saturday 23 February 2008, Benson Margulies wrote: 2.0.4 doesn't know anything about xmime:expectedContentType, AFAIK. Do you have the @MTOM annotation in place to enable the threshold? Yea, you're backwords 2.0.4 should deal with the expectedContentType stuff fine. It DOESN'T,

Re: MTOM attachments question

2008-02-24 Thread Benson Margulies
I'm sorry, my head was on sideways. I was confusing the WSDL extension with the xmime stuff (xmime:base64Binary) that goes on the wire. On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really? Our MTOM docs mention the expectedContentType attribution in multiple places:

Re: MTOM attachments question

2008-02-23 Thread Glen Mazza
Really? Our MTOM docs mention the expectedContentType attribution in multiple places: http://cwiki.apache.org/CXF20DOC/mtom.html. I wonder if CXF could pass the TCK if it actually ignored it. Glen Am Samstag, den 23.02.2008, 12:33 -0500 schrieb Benson Margulies: 2.0.4 doesn't know anything

Re: MTOM attachments question

2008-02-22 Thread Glen Mazza
Some possibilities: 1.) From Step #5 of [1], make sure you have xmime:expectedContentTypes declared in your WSDL (you can see me using it under element name=getWeatherForecastResponse at the top). 2.) From Step #6 of [1], make sure you use @BindingType annotation just before your web service