axis-c-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dimuthu Gamage" <>
Subject Re: WSDL2C create function conflicts with SOAP operation named create
Date Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:14:38 GMT
Hi Bill,
Currently whenever there is a name conflict in schema elements, they will be
named with a post fix. And in the headers we should show the namespaces, so
the developers will be able to figure out the right element.


On Nov 21, 2007 8:16 AM, Bill Mitchell <> wrote:

> If I understand your reference to the absence of namespaces in my example,
> Dimuthu, you are correct to identify that as a distinct but similar name
> uniqueness issue.  Certainly the WSDL itself could contain name conflicts
> that are resolved through the use of distinct namespaces.  So, where I
> wrote
> "axis2_stub_start_op_servicename_opname", in the general case that would
> need to be "axis2_stub_start_op_ns1_servicename_ns2_opname".  This could
> certainly be remedied as part of the same project.  In the simple case
> where
> all the user names are part of the same namespace, one could default to
> the
> status quo and leave these out.  To handle the general case, one could use
> the -N command line argument to WSDL2Java for the similar purpose here.
> This would allow the WSDL2C user to determine the prefix to be used for
> each
> namespace.  The important part to avoid name conflicts, similar to the
> other
> situations I raised, is that every element always be generated or never
> generated.  In a situation where namespace identifiers are included, they
> need to be included everywhere to guarantee that a namespace identifier in
> one place is not confused with the same string that is part of a user name
> in another place.
> And, of course, the other important part is the suggestion I made below,
> that all parts of the Axis generated name precede any parts of the user
> name, and no Axis string prefix be the leading substring of another Axis
> generated string prefix.
> I made my suggestion for an option to preserve the status quo only to
> handle
> the case where you folks think there is enough installed base and the
> change
> is awkward enough to demand it.  I personally don't have a strong opinion
> one way or the other on compatibility with the status quo.
> Thanks,
> Bill
> Hi Bill,
> So briefly your suggestion is,
> For wsdl operations in the stub,
> axis2_stub_servicename_opname should be replaced with
> axis2_stub_op_servicename_opname.
> axis2_stub_servicename_opname_start should be replaced with
> axis2_stub_start_op_servicename_opname.
> and for consistency non wsdl-operations in the stub,
> axis2_stub_servicename_create should be replaced with
> axis2_stub_create_servicename.
> The only issue against this suggestion is, there the namespace part of the
> operation is not prefixed. But we can just forget that, if this  solves
>  all
> the problems.
> Anyway I doubt whether we can provide the old functions with a user
> option,
> since it need to add some code to the java tool (code portions not
> specific
> to c codegeneration), But we can give a try.
> I will let devs know this discussion and ask their suggestions.
> Thanks
> Dimuthu
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Axis - C++ - User mailing list archive at
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message