This is all correct. Arrays/collections in "bare" mode really don't work
well. Global elements in schema aren't allowed to have a "maxOccurs" on
them. Since doc/lit has to point at an element, we have to generate a pseudo
element that points to a sequence with an element with the maxOccurs. Kind
of a wrapped thing.
Code generated from that would then generate a type for that wrapper type
thing and point at it.
Anyway, a bit strange, but is working properly. For the most part though,
I'd recommend sticking to wrapped doc/lit for code first type things.
Dan
On Thursday 09 October 2008 7:12:49 am Libor Svehlak wrote:
> I need to use document/literal/bare SOAP binding I'm little bit surprised
> about difference of passing array parameters when using this SOAP binding
> in oposite to document/literal/wrapped style.
>
> I have following simple interface:
>
> @WebService
> @SOAPBinding(style=Style.DOCUMENT, use=Use.LITERAL, parameterStyle =
> ParameterStyle.BARE)
> public interface ITestWebService {
> public void testPassingArray(@WebParam(name = "arrayOfLongs") Long[]
> arrayOfLongs);
> }
>
> Auto-generated WSDL (by CXF version 2.1.2) looks like following:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" ?><wsdl:definitions
> name="TestBareWebServiceImplService"
> targetNamespace="http://testbare.webservice.com/";
> xmlns:ns1="http://cxf.apache.org/bindings/xformat";
> xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/";
> xmlns:tns="http://testbare.webservice.com/";
> xmlns:wsdl="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/";
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";>
> <wsdl:types>
> <xs:schema attributeFormDefault="unqualified"
> elementFormDefault="unqualified"
> targetNamespace="http://jaxb.dev.java.net/array";
> xmlns="http://jaxb.dev.java.net/array";
> xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";>
> <xs:complexType final="#all" name="longArray">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element maxOccurs="unbounded" minOccurs="0" name="item"
> nillable="true" type="xs:long"></xs:element>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:complexType>
> </xs:schema>
> <xsd:schema attributeFormDefault="unqualified"
> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> targetNamespace="http://testbare.webservice.com/";
> xmlns:ns0="http://jaxb.dev.java.net/array";
> xmlns:tns="http://testbare.webservice.com/";
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";>
> <xsd:import namespace="http://jaxb.dev.java.net/array";></xsd:import>
> <xsd:element name="arrayOfLongs" nillable="true"
> type="ns0:longArray"></xsd:element>
> </xsd:schema>
> </wsdl:types>
> <wsdl:message name="testPassingArray">
> <wsdl:part element="tns:arrayOfLongs" name="arrayOfLongs">
> </wsdl:part>
> </wsdl:message>
> <wsdl:message name="testPassingArrayResponse">
> </wsdl:message>
> <wsdl:portType name="ITestWebService">
> <wsdl:operation name="testPassingArray">
> <wsdl:input message="tns:testPassingArray" name="testPassingArray">
> </wsdl:input>
> <wsdl:output message="tns:testPassingArrayResponse"
> name="testPassingArrayResponse">
> </wsdl:output>
> </wsdl:operation>
> </wsdl:portType>
> <wsdl:binding name="TestBareWebServiceImplServiceSoapBinding"
> type="tns:ITestWebService">
> <soap:binding style="document"
> transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http";></soap:binding>
> <wsdl:operation name="testPassingArray">
> <soap:operation soapAction="" style="document"></soap:operation>
> <wsdl:input name="testPassingArray">
> <soap:body use="literal"></soap:body>
> </wsdl:input>
> <wsdl:output name="testPassingArrayResponse">
> <soap:body use="literal"></soap:body>
> </wsdl:output>
> </wsdl:operation>
> </wsdl:binding>
> <wsdl:service name="TestBareWebServiceImplService">
> <wsdl:port binding="tns:TestBareWebServiceImplServiceSoapBinding"
> name="TestBareWebServiceImplPort">
> <soap:address
> location="http://localhost:8080/ProwebWebServices/services/TestBareWebServi
>ce"></soap:address> </wsdl:port>
> </wsdl:service>
> </wsdl:definitions>
>
> When I generate Java client stubs from this WSDL generated interface looks
> like following:
>
> @WebService(targetNamespace = "http://testbare.webservice.com/";, name =
> "ITestWebService")
> @XmlSeeAlso({ObjectFactory.class})
> @SOAPBinding(parameterStyle = SOAPBinding.ParameterStyle.BARE)
> public interface ITestWebService {
>
> @WebMethod
> public void testPassingArray(
> @WebParam(partName = "arrayOfLongs", name = "arrayOfLongs",
> targetNamespace = "http://testbare.webservice.com/";)
> LongArray arrayOfLongs
> );
> }
>
> I'm surprised that array parameter is "wrapped" in generated class
> LongArray through which I need to access internal list of items. I have
> expected that generated method on the client side is something like
> following:
>
> @WebMethod
> public void testPassingArray(
> @WebParam(partName = "arrayOfLongs", name = "arrayOfLongs",
> targetNamespace = "http://testbare.webservice.com/";)
> java.util.List<java.lang.Long> arrayOfLongs
> );
>
> When I'm using document/literal/wrapped SOAP binding then generated client
> stub interface is "more friendly and logical":
>
> @WebService(targetNamespace = "http://testbare.webservice.com/";, name =
> "ITestWebService")
> @XmlSeeAlso({ObjectFactory.class})
> public interface ITestWebService {
>
> @RequestWrapper(localName = "testPassingArray", targetNamespace =
> "http://testbare.webservice.com/";, className =
> "com.webservices.test.TestPassingArray")
> @ResponseWrapper(localName = "testPassingArrayResponse",
> targetNamespace = "http://testbare.webservice.com/";, className =
> "com.webservices.test.TestPassingArrayResponse")
> @WebMethod
> public void testPassingArray(
> @WebParam(name = "arrayOfLongs", targetNamespace = "")
> java.util.List<java.lang.Long> arrayOfLongs
> );
> }
>
> Is this expected behavior when using document/literal/bare SOAP binding?
> Originally I thought that when I switch from wrapped to bare client will
> compile without any changes. But it seems that client stubs are different
> and I need to adapt my client to the little bit different generated
> interfaces.
>
> Can someone explain me if described behovior is correct or is it a bug?
> Shouldn't be generated interfaces on the client side still the same
> independent of which SOAP binding is currently used?
--
Daniel Kulp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dankulp.com/blog
