I may be wrong here but that's just for the SOAP binding within WSDL (which has other bindings, namely the HTTP one) A JMS binding with WSDL would not be relevant for the SOAP-binding rule below then.
Glen Dan Retzlaff wrote: > > The jms_queue and jms_pubsub samples configure their <wsdl:port/>s with a > <jms:address/> element instead of a <soap:address/> element. This looks > like > the only way to get CXF's JMS transport to actually work, but I believe > it's > technically invalid. According to the WSDL spec at > http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl#_soap:address: > >> 3.8 soap:address >> >> The SOAP address binding is used to give a port an address (a URI). A >> port >> using the SOAP binding MUST specify exactly one address. The URI scheme >> specified for the address must correspond to the transport specified by >> the >> soap:binding. >> > Is this discrepency worthy of a JIRA report? I'm guessing this URI-based > transport specification isn't as easy to do with the current > implementation, > but looking through the forum history, I'm not the first to be confused by > this. In my case XMLSpy complains every time I try to validate my > CXF-compatible WSDLs. > > Regards, > Dan > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invalid-WSDL-for-SOAP-over-JMS-tp18367273p18368624.html Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
