Thanks a lot for you advice Geert, In general I'm moving away from Spring and try to minimize its use. I think it brings on it's own little world these days which I do not want. It might of course be an option if there is no other way. It seems like there must be a way to tell CXF what wsdl to return without using Spring but plain old java. Isn't there?
/Bengt 2011/10/28 Geert Schuring <[email protected]> > Bengt, > > If you're creating the CXF endpoint in Spring you could use the following > example: > > 1) <jaxws:endpoint > 2) id="classImpl" > 3) wsdlLocation="wsdl/helloService.wsdl" > 4) implementor="org.apache.cxf.jaxws.service.Hello" > 5) address="http://localhost:8080/test"; > > Here you see on line 3 that the endpoint uses a concrete WSDL file bundled > with your application rather then reconstructing a WSDL using the > annotations on the SEI. Restrictions and regex patterns in the WSDL cannot > be translated to annotations on your SEI, which is why the reconstructed > WSDL does not contain them. The restrictions are lost in the transformation > to and from JAX-WS and JAX-B. By packaging the original WSDL with your > implementation the CXF endpoint can simply serve the original WSDL to > clients that call the something?wsdl url, and use your supplied > implementation (line 4) to handle the incoming messages. > > BTW, you can also enable schema validation on the endpoint. See > > http://cxf.apache.org/faq.html#FAQ-HowcanIturnonschemavalidationforjaxwsendpoint%3F > > Good luck! > Geert Schuring. > > Links: > http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jax-ws-configuration.html > > > > 2011/10/28 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > Hello Geert. Thanks for your answer. > > > > We use wsdl2java to generate an interface (the SEI) that we then > implement. > > Sounds like the way you describe it. Is there an alternate way to do this > > that will preserve the wsdl? Or is there an easy way to just intercept > the > > wsdl query and make sure that the original wsdl and xsd's are returned? > > > > /Bengt > > > > 2011/10/26 Geert Schuring <[email protected]> > > > > > Bengt, > > > > > > How do you create the CXF endpoint? The behaviour you describe is > exactly > > > what I would expect when you generate the SEI from a WSDL document and > > then > > > use the SEI to create a CXF endpoint. The SEI will contain JAX-B > > annotated > > > types and CXF will reconstruct the WSDL at runtime based on the JAX-WS > > and > > > JAX-B annotations on your interface and classes, instead of using the > > WSDL > > > you used at compile-time. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > Geert Schuring. > > > > > > 2011/10/3 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > > > > > I've done some more testing. It seems like restrictions on strings > that > > > use > > > > enumerations are preserved but that's really the only kind of > "strict" > > > > typing that seems to be preserved when querying the WSDL in runtime. > > > Also, > > > > the documentation is lost. > > > > > > > > Using this type definition > > > > > > > > <simpleType name="PositionType"> > > > > <annotation> > > > > <documentation> > > > > L = Long (Innehavd/inlånad) > > > > S = Short (Utfärdad/utlånad) > > > > </documentation> > > > > </annotation> > > > > <restriction base="string"> > > > > <enumeration value="L" /> > > > > <enumeration value="S" /> > > > > </restriction> > > > > </simpleType> > > > > > > > > The enumeration is preserved but the documentation is lost. The below > > > will > > > > simply be transformed to a "xs:string" in the runtime wsdl - no > length > > > > information is preserved: > > > > > > > > <simpleType name="SecurityId"> > > > > <restriction base="string"> > > > > <minLength value="0"></minLength> > > > > <maxLength value="12"></maxLength> > > > > </restriction> > > > > </simpleType> > > > > > > > > The below will be transformed to a "xs:decimal" without information > > about > > > > no > > > > of digits and decimals: > > > > > > > > <simpleType name="SecurityCount"> > > > > <restriction base="decimal"> > > > > <totalDigits value="19" /> > > > > <fractionDigits value="6" /> > > > > </restriction> > > > > </simpleType> > > > > > > > > > > > > The following will be transformed into a "xs:int" without information > > > about > > > > maximum no of digits: > > > > > > > > <simpleType name="AccountId"> > > > > <restriction base="nonNegativeInteger"> > > > > <maxInclusive value="99999999" /> > > > > </restriction> > > > > </simpleType> > > > > > > > > I think this is serious. Ideally CXF should return the wsdl I started > > out > > > > with but containing the correct runtime bindings regarding e g > address > > > and > > > > port. It seems to me that CXF extracts the information that it needs > > for > > > > itself and excludes the rest. But the wsdl query's purpose is not for > > the > > > > CXF server but for the clients. Clients could be implemented using > any > > > > technique which is why all available metadata should be provided. > Also, > > > > wsdl > > > > is a perfect place for documentation but it's all removed. I don't > > really > > > > understand why CXF doesn't answer with the original wsdl when "wsdl > > > first" > > > > is used. > > > > > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > > > 2011/10/3 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > I don't promise anything since we're pretty much under pressure > here > > > (as > > > > > always I guess). But I'll try, > > > > > > > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2011/10/3 Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> Any chance you could file a test case? We do have some tests to > > make > > > > >> sure > > > > >> the annotations and stuff are preserved. However, they may be for > > > > >> external > > > > >> xsd's, not schemas embedded in the wsdl. I'd have to dig in more > > to > > > > >> check > > > > >> that, but a test case would be great. > > > > >> > > > > >> Dan > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Saturday, October 01, 2011 10:08:42 AM Bengt Rodehav wrote: > > > > >> > Hello, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We're using CXF 2.4.2 to provide a web service API to a legacy > > > > >> application. > > > > >> > We are in the process of increasing the quality of the API in a > > > number > > > > >> of > > > > >> > ways. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > First, we are typing the interface more strictly. E g instead of > > > > >> specifying > > > > >> > that a value is a string, we say that it's exactly one character > > > long > > > > >> and > > > > >> > also enumerate it's valid values. We also try to add > documentation > > > to > > > > >> the > > > > >> > WSDL. The following is a typical case: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > <xs:simpleType name="MyType"> > > > > >> > <xs:annotation> > > > > >> > <xs:documentation> > > > > >> > A = ... > > > > >> > B = ... > > > > >> > C = ... > > > > >> > </xs:documentation> > > > > >> > </xs:annotation> > > > > >> > <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> > > > > >> > <xs:pattern value="A|B|C" /> > > > > >> > </xs:restriction> > > > > >> > </xs:simpleType> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > However, even if we feed the above WSDL to CXF (we use WSDL > > first), > > > in > > > > >> > runtime when asking for the WSDL (using ...?wsdl), the above > > > > information > > > > >> is > > > > >> > gone. The type is simply a string and the documentation is gone. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Why is this? Is it a bug? What is best practice regarding strict > > > > >> interfaces > > > > >> > and documentation using CXF? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > /Bengt > > > > >> -- > > > > >> Daniel Kulp > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > >> http://dankulp.com/blog > > > > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
