A start of it is available since the 11th so any build since then will have it in which you could give a try.
...ant On 8/13/07, Radim Kolarik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > is there any "on the fly" WSDL generation functionality available for > testing in nightly builds? If not, could you please give me any idea > when it would be available for testing? > > Thanks, > Radim > > On 8/9/07, Radim Kolarik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think you are right Raymond, my thinking was that generated JAXB > > classes are in fact POJOs so it should be possible to use them as > > service parameters. However, it would be necessary to use actual > > implementation classes as parameters on the service interface, not the > > JAXB interfaces, which is an ugly solution. But if it was done like > > that the generated schema within the WSDL would not necesseraly comply > > with the schema that the JAXB classes represent, but it would be a > > valid schema usable by clients. > > > > Thanks, > > Radim > > > > On 8/8/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We only support JAXB 2.x at this moment. > > > > > > Can you elaborate what you meant by "JAXB classes would be handled as > > > POJOs"? JAXB objects can be marshaled as XML conforming to the XSD > that is > > > used to generated the JAXB classes. What do you expect for the > POJO/XML > > > roundtrip here? Yes, we can do best efforts for the JavaBeans and > simple > > > types, but I don't think it would be interoperable. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Raymond > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Radim Kolarik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:28 AM > > > Subject: Re: Services and WSDL files > > > > > > > > > > And one more question: You mentioned annotations. Will JAXB 1.0.5 be > > > > supported as well? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Radim > > > > > > > > On 8/8/07, Radim Kolarik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Raymond, > > > >> > > > >> But what would happen if the JAXB classes would be handled as > POJOs? > > > >> Wouldn't it work anyway? My understanding is that the actual > > > >> communication would be exchanging XMLs which do not fully comply > with > > > >> a specific schema, but wouldn't the objects get deserialized to > proper > > > >> JAXB classes on server anyway? > > > >> > > > >> Thanks, > > > >> Radim > > > >> > > > >> On 8/8/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > Comments line. > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > >> > Raymond > > > >> > > > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> > From: "Radim Kolarik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> > To: <[email protected]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 4:16 AM > > > >> > Subject: Re: Services and WSDL files > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi Ant, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > That is great news! Thanks! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > It's just POJOs and possibly JAXB objects as well for now. Is > there > > > >> > > any difference between POJOs and JAXB objects, regarding WSDL > type > > > >> > > definition? > > > >> > > > > >> > Yes, there is a big difference :-). The JAXB objects bear > metadata (by > > > >> > annotations) for the XSD definitions and JAXB defines the mapping > rules > > > >> > for > > > >> > Java/XML. In the POJO space, we don't have such a standard. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > > Radim > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On 8/8/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> I'm looking at the on the fly wsdl generation right now. What > type > > > >> > >> of > > > >> > >> objects are used in your Java interfaces - just POJOs or SDOs > or > > > >> > >> JAXB > > > >> > >> objects or something else? > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> ...ant > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> On 8/7/07, Radim Kolarik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > I think we shouldn't mix two things together. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > 1) <interface.wsdl>, which you mentioned now, says that the > > > >> > >> > interface > > > >> > >> > of a particular service is wsdl interface (not java > interface). In > > > >> > >> > such case, I agree that the wsdl must exist and there is no > > > >> > >> > anticipation to generate such interface on fly. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > 2) <binding.ws> where we want to expose existing service > with > > > >> > >> > interface written in java, as a web service. In such case > the > > > >> > >> > interface is described by annotated java class. At the > moment, it > > > >> > >> > is > > > >> > >> > necessary to specify wsdl parameter like this: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > wsdlElement=" > > > >> > >> > > http://helloworld#wsdl.port(HelloWorldService/HelloWorldServiceSOAP11port) > > > >> > >> > " > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > which points to an existing WSDL, rather than WSDL being > generated > > > >> > >> > on > > > >> > >> > the fly, from existing java interface. This is by the way > how > > > >> > >> > Axis2 > > > >> > >> > works; the services are described in services.xml file and > there > > > >> > >> > is no > > > >> > >> > need to write WSDL from them separately, it is generated on > the > > > >> > >> > fly. > > > >> > >> > It should be possible to use <binding.ws/> without any > parameters, > > > >> > >> > which would seamlessly expose the service as a web service, > > > >> > >> > without > > > >> > >> > need to generate WSDL file separately and manually. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > So in ideal situation, .composite file would look like this: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > <composite xmlns="http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0"; > > > >> > >> > targetNamespace="http://helloworld"; > > > >> > >> > xmlns:hw="http://helloworld"; > > > >> > >> > name="helloworldws"> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > <component name="HelloWorldServiceComponent"> > > > >> > >> > <service name="HelloWorldService"> > > > >> > >> > <interface.java > > > >> > >> > interface="helloworld.HelloWorldService"/> > > > >> > >> > <binding.ws > > > >> > >> > wsdlElement=" > > > >> > >> > > http://helloworld#wsdl.port(HelloWorldService/HelloWorldServiceSOAP11port) > > > >> > >> > "/> > > > >> > >> > </service> > > > >> > >> > <implementation.java class="helloworld.HelloWorldImpl" > /> > > > >> > >> > </component> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > </composite> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Best regards, > > > >> > >> > Radim > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > On 8/7/07, shaoguang geng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > This feature has been inquired seval times. Unfortunately, > there > > > >> > >> > > is a > > > >> > >> > wound in SCA1.0's <interface.wsdl> specification. It > requires a > > > >> > >> > uri > > > >> > >> > like > > > >> > >> > attribute which point to a wsdl infact. It means there > should > > > >> > >> > exist a > > > >> > >> > wsdl > > > >> > >> > already so that <interface.wsdl> could refer to. > > > >> > >> > > But how will it make sence, if the service generate wsdl > "on > > > >> > >> > > fly" > > > >> > >> > > again. > > > >> > >> > SCA-WebServiceBinding_V100 does metioned this "on fly" > feathre as > > > >> > >> > you > > > >> > >> > said, > > > >> > >> > but as my opinion is, it is just a cross work, of no value. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Or SCA's spec might get improved in the near future. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Radim. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > I'm not very sure if we already have the support to deploy > an > > > >> > >> > > SCA > > > >> > >> > service as > > > >> > >> > > a web service without WSDL. If not, that's something we > want to > > > >> > >> > > support > > > >> > >> > for > > > >> > >> > > sure. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > We have a sample to demonstrate the usage of SCA, web > service > > > >> > >> > > and > > > >> > >> > > SDO. > > > >> > >> > It > > > >> > >> > > seems to be what you are looking for. You can see the > sample > > > >> > >> > > code at: > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/samples/helloworld-ws-sdo > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > >> > > Raymond > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> > >> > > From: "Radim Kolarik" > > > >> > >> > > To: > > > >> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 7:38 AM > > > >> > >> > > Subject: Services and WSDL files > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Hi, > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Is it necessary to supply wsdl file if I want to deploy > an SCA > > > >> > >> > > > service > > > >> > >> > as > > > >> > >> > > > a > > > >> > >> > > > web service? Or can Tuscany generate the file "on the > fly"? > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > If I need to supply the file myself, what would be the > best > > > >> > >> > > > way to > > > >> > >> > > > generate > > > >> > >> > > > the file? Is it possible to generate the file for SDOs, > if > > > >> > >> > > > they are > > > >> > >> > > > service > > > >> > >> > > > parameters or if a service returns an SDO object as its > > > >> > >> > > > result? > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks, > > > >> > >> > > > Radim > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > --------------------------------- > > > >> > >> > > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
