Bruno, WSDL 1.0 doesn't include inheritance..That is the issue. That is why you copy and paste what you want into your wsdl.... I think that's answering part of your question...
We generate based on port because the port references the binding which references the portType which contains the operations....The ports seem like the obvious place to separate the endpoints...That being said, there is no reason you couldn't alter the generated interface and code to contain all the operations and map the resource to a single type....You can do this to meet your needs. The thing to watch out for is common operations in portTypes...If you had the same operation defined in two portTypes and you collapse this to one, does it still make sense for you? Bottom line is you can do it. I do not, however think we should generate one class just for the service as opposed to generating on the ports... -S -----Original Message----- From: Bruno Harbulot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 9:38 AM To: wsrf-user@ws.apache.org Subject: WSDL Structure and port types Hello, I'm trying to reuse WSDL files for WSRF services (that weren't using Apache WSRF). I'm only interested in the operations regarding the resource properties for the moment. I have several of these services, so I would like to avoid duplicating the same thing, in particular the port types for the WS-ResourceProperties operations. At the moment, I've written a common WSRF.wsdl file that contains a port type of this form: <wsdl:portType name="WSRFOperations"> <wsdl:operation name="GetResourceProperty"> <wsdl:input message="wsrp:GetResourcePropertyRequest" name="GetResourcePropertyRequest"/> <wsdl:output message="wsrp:GetResourcePropertyResponse" name="GetResourcePropertyResponse"/> <wsdl:fault message="wsrp:ResourceUnknownFault" name="ResourceUnknownFault"/> <wsdl:fault message="wsrp:InvalidResourcePropertyQNameFault" name="InvalidResourcePropertyQNameFault"/> </wsdl:operation> <wsdl:operation name="GetMultipleResourceProperties"> <!-- ... --> </wsdl:operation> <!-- + other operations of WS-ResourceProperties ... --> </wsdl:porttype> In short, this is the same as <http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/rpw-2.wsdl>, except that I've merged all the port types for all the operations into a single one. Then, each resource WSDL uses: <import location="WSRF.wsdl" namespace="http://www.ibm.com/xmlns/stdwip/web-services/WS-ResourcePrope rties"/> <service name="MyResource"> <port binding="tns:MyResourceSpecificSoapBinding" name="MyResourcePort"> <soap:address location="http://localhost/.../"/> </port> <port binding="wsrf:WSRFOperationsSoapBinding" name="MyResourceWSRFPort"> <soap:address location="http://localhost/.../"/> </port> </service> (I'm using two ports because one is for the WSRF properties and the other one is for operations specific to that resource.) Unfortunately, WSDL2Java (in WSRF 1.0) generates two sets of classes, one for each port, whereas I would really like just one set of classes (one per service and not per port). Is my way of writing the WSDL file incorrect or discouraged? I would assume not, since if I took <http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/rpw-2.wsdl>, I would end up with even more sets of classes. Is there any way to avoid copying and pasting all the WS-ResourceProperties entries into the WSDL file (to avoid what's done in the Filesystem example)? Perhaps one way around this would be to use a single back end object for several instances of 'Resource' corresponding in fact to a single resource, therefore the factory would have to create several resources for a single back-end resource. This seems long and a bit hard to maintain and synchronise. Regards, Bruno. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
