Have anyone looked at this. Or do i need to have a complete testcase first? Or clearify anything ?
Thanks in advance Daniel forda wrote: > > Hi Daniel ! > > Ok, what exactly do mean by the TCK's ? Current version of CXF or furture > version ? > We are using version 2.2.2 of CXF, thers is a 2.2.3 should we use that > instead? > > Of course will provide a testcase soon which exemplifies the flow. > Let's start explain how the Custom faults are structured in schemas > and WSDL. > > 3 similiar xsd represent a customized faultmessage only separated by the > name > of the xsd. In the wsdl the faultmessage is referenced in the message of > the actual fault. > > Any JAXB binding needed to make it work during the codegeneration step. > Cause no annotation for WebFault is set at the porttype/interface in the > generated code. > Any idea ? > > I attached the xsds and a sample wsdl. > > Thanks in advance. > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p25023355/Systemfelmeddelande.xsd > Systemfelmeddelande.xsd > http://www.nabble.com/file/p25023355/Systemfelmeddelande.xsd > Systemfelmeddelande.xsd > http://www.nabble.com/file/p25023355/Verksamhetsfelmeddelande.xsd > Verksamhetsfelmeddelande.xsd > http://www.nabble.com/file/p25023355/Foretag.wsdl Foretag.wsdl > > > > dkulp wrote: >> >> On Thu August 13 2009 9:38:48 am forda wrote: >>> Hi ! >>> >>> Is there a way, except creating a custom interceptor, in the latest >>> version >>> of the CXF framework to make custom fault propagated in a SOAPFault's >>> detail ? Dose'nt seem to work by default ? >> >> It should be working since the TCK's that we test with explicitely test >> it. >> Do you have an example testcase that shows any issue? >> >> -- >> Daniel Kulp >> [email protected] >> http://www.dankulp.com/blog >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Custom-Fault-defined-in-WSDL-not-assigned-to-SOAPFault-detail-tp24954475p25075908.html Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
