Thanks for the reply, Dan.

It's JUST the message name and input name in the wsdl. The element name in
the part is not changed.

Thanks,

Li


dkulp wrote:
> 
>  
> This is a spec compliance thing.   XFire was never tested to be JAX-WS 
> compliant so there are a lot of things in there that aren't.   CXF is 
> completely compliant and thus follows the spec.   
> 
> I don't know a ton about the XFire defaults.   Is it JUST the message name
> in 
> the wsdl?   Or is the element name in the part also affected.   If it's
> just 
> the message name, the only place this would have any affect would be the
> WS-
> Addressing action header.   If you aren't using WS-Addressing, then it
> should 
> have no affect.
> 
> If the element name is also different, that's more of an issue and you'd 
> probably need to add @RequestWrapper annotations to control the name to
> get 
> them to match the old name.
> 
> Dan
> 
> On Tue August 25 2009 8:08:09 pm liw wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are migrating from xfire to cxf. We noticed that the input name in the
>> wsdl generated from cxf is different from the one generated from xfire.
>>
>> For example, with xfire we have
>>
>>  <wsdl:portType name="LocationService">
>>         <wsdl:operation name="getAccountLocation">
>>             <wsdl:input message="tns:getAccountLocationRequest"
>> name="getAccountLocationRequest"/>
>>             <wsdl:output message="tns:getAccountLocationResponse"
>> name="getAccountLocationResponse"/>
>>             <wsdl:fault message="tns:ApiFault" name="ApiFault"/>
>>         </wsdl:operation>
>>     </wsdl:portType>
>>
>>
>> However, with cxf, the input name is "getAccountLocation" instead of
>> "getAccountLocationRequest".
>>
>> <wsdl:portType name="LocationService">
>>         <wsdl:operation name="getAccountLocation">
>>             <wsdl:input message="tns:getAccountLocation"
>> name="getAccountLocation"/>
>>             <wsdl:output message="tns:getAccountLocationResponse"
>> name="getAccountLocationResponse"/>
>>             <wsdl:fault message="tns:ApiFault" name="ApiFault"/>
>>         </wsdl:operation>
>>     </wsdl:portType>
>>
>>
>> I wonder if there is any specific reason to introduce this difference in
>> cxf. Does anyone know how the difference impacts the existing web service
>> clients who uses the old wsdls?
>>
>> My understanding is that input name is just used to reference the message
>> definition in the wsdl document. It's something internal to the wsdl and
>> not exposed to any soap client tool such as SoapUI and Axis. However, I
>> didn't find any info about how the input name is used in the wsdl 1.1
>> spec.
>>
>> Please let me know if you have any thoughts on this.
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Li
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Kulp
> [email protected]
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/input-name-in-the-wsdl-generated-from-cxf-2.1*-doesn%27t-have-%22Request%22-tp25144464p25184089.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to