Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote: > > [snip] > > Simon Laws wrote: > >> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature > >> > >> String foo() > >> > >> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates > >> > >> <wsdl:types> > >> <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; > >> attributeFormDefault="qualified" > >> elementFormDefault="qualified" > >> targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";> > >> <xs:element name="fooResponse"> > >> <xs:complexType> > >> <xs:sequence> > >> <xs:element name="return" nillable="true" > >> type="xs:string" /> > >> </xs:sequence> > >> </xs:complexType> > >> </xs:element> > >> </xs:schema> > >> </wsdl:types> > >> <wsdl:message name="fooMessage" /> > >> <wsdl:message name="fooResponseMessage"> > >> <wsdl:part name="part1" element="ns:fooResponse" /> > >> </wsdl:message> > >> > >> > > > > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side: > > - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm? > > - or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2? > > > > I have the following two questions: > > 1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it > > doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no > > "foo" element to carry it)? > > > > 2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated > > binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question (1). > > > > Thanks > > > > OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I > should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action. > > I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for > now, as: > (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated > by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control > (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not > worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it > won't introduce any other side effects > > I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this > bug. > > -- > Jean-Sebastien > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
