Definitely. It sounded to me like a more general error that could be made more specific. I'll file a bug for it for you to address when you have some time. Just glad I figured it out. :)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Glen Mazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, perhaps we should change the text of the error message to make it > more obvious what the problem was. > > "wsdl:message referred to by soap:header could not be found" might save > people a lot of time in troubleshooting. > > Glen > > >> java.lang.RuntimeException: Header message not defined in service > > >> model. > > > > 2008-06-19 Daniel Kulp wrote: > > On Jun 19, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Ryan Moquin wrote: > > > > > Never mind.. I figured out the problem finally. If you have a > > > soap:header > > > element referring to a message that doesn't exist, you apparently > > > get this > > > message... which is so hard to find due to the message, but due to > > > the fact > > > that I haven't found any tools that will catch this problem.. I just > > > happened to figure out the problem by trial and error.... > > > > Did our wsdl validator command line tool not catch it? If not, > > please log a bug. That would be a good one to catch. > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Ryan Moquin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello, > > >> > > >> I'm upgrading to a new version of servicemix and therefore > > >> upgrading to use > > >> CXF 2.0.7 since that's what servicemix was tested with. For some > > >> reason > > >> though, I'm getting the follow message during my build when CXF > > >> attempts to > > >> process one of my WSDLs: > > >> > > >> java.lang.RuntimeException: Header message not defined in service > > >> model. > > >> > > >> Can someone tell me what that means specifically? I didn't get > > >> this error > > >> in 2.0.1. Also, if I look at another WSDL I have that uses > > >> headers, I > > >> don't see any difference, yet that one processed correctly through > > >> 2.0.7. > > >> I'm hoping someone can get me on the correct track to resolve this > > >> problem. > > >> > > >> Thanks!! > > >> > > > > --- > > Daniel Kulp > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > > > > > > > > >
