On 8/10/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What happens if you change the example a little bit to: > <component name="CalculatorServiceComponent"> > <implementation.java class=" > calculator.CalculatorServiceImpl"/> > <reference name="addService" target="AddServiceComponent" /> > <reference name="subtractService" > target="SubtractServiceComponent" /> > <reference name="multiplyService" > target="MultiplyServiceComponent"> > <interface.java interface="calculator.MultiplyService" /> > <binding.ws wsdlElement=" > http://calculator#wsdl.binding(MultiplySoapBinding)"/> > </reference> > <reference name="divideService" target="DivideServiceComponent" > /> > </component> > <component name="MultiplyServiceComponent"> > <implementation.java class="calculator.MultiplyServiceImpl" /> > <service> > <interface.java interface="calculator.MultiplyService" /> > <binding.ws wsdlElement=" > http://calculator#wsdl.port(MultiplySoapPort)"/> > </service> > </component> > > I believe this is valid according to the spec. Does it work? > > Simon > > gengshaoguang (JIRA) wrote: > > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1526?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12518963] > > > > gengshaoguang commented on TUSCANY-1526: > > ---------------------------------------- > > > > I read SCA_WebServiceBinding_V100 again, I think there might miss some > restrictions againse "cross reference" like you mentioned here. > > I agree with you. > > For the time being, we need to document it as a poor practise. > > > > > >>Trying to wire a non-wireable binding should fal gracefully > >>----------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Key: TUSCANY-1526 > >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1526 > >> Project: Tuscany > >> Issue Type: Bug > >> Components: Java SCA Core Runtime > >> Environment: All > >> Reporter: Simon Laws > >> Priority: Minor > >> > >>If I do something like > >> <component name="CalculatorServiceComponent"> > >> <implementation.java class=" > calculator.CalculatorServiceImpl"/> > >> <reference name="addService" target="AddServiceComponent" /> > >> <reference name="subtractService" > target="SubtractServiceComponent" /> > >> <reference name="multiplyService" > target="MultiplyServiceComponent"> > >> <interface.java interface="calculator.MultiplyService" /> > >> <binding.ws wsdlElement=" > http://calculator#wsdl.binding(MultiplySoapBinding)"/> > >> </reference> > >> <reference name="divideService" target="DivideServiceComponent" > /> > >> </component> > >> <component name="MultiplyServiceComponent"> > >> <implementation.java class="calculator.MultiplyServiceImpl" /> > >> <service> > >> <interface.java interface="calculator.MultiplyService" /> > >> <binding.ws wsdlElement=" > http://calculator#wsdl.binding(MultiplySoapBinding)"/> > >> </service> > >> </component> > >>I belive it should tell me that I'm trying to wire the mutiplyService > reference up with a binding that is not wireable. Currently it fails in the > axis2 binding URL handling code with an NPE. > >>The runtime should just not load the contribution. I guess we could get > smarter and introduce a wireable binding but we would be trying to second > guess the deployers orignal intention which I don't think is a good idea. > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Having looked back at the spec I think both of these exampled should be valid. I.e that the tuscany runtime should be able to workout what the endpoint uri is based on the SCDL wiring. Does anyone have examples of bindings that are explicitly not wireable in which case an error would be validly produced?
Simon
