> Look for a chain associated with the URI.
How do you see that association being made?
Do we want people to use URIs as the name?
-Dug
James M Snell/Fresno/IBM@IBMUS@IBMUS on 10/04/2001 02:24:47 PM
Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org
To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject: Re: transports & wsdl
Doug,
Yep...
Look for a chain associated with the URI.
-1 on the QName option.
This is the direction I was looking at for WSDL based deployment (which,
btw, I'm currently working on the code for as I have time)
And oh, btw, I haven't forgotten about the resolver questions you asked in
regards to my post a while back... I'm just putting together some code
that demonstrates the differences/advantages, etc. The code will speaks
better than me wordages. ;-)
- James Snell
Software Engineer, Internet Emerging Technologies, IBM
James M Snell/Fresno/IBM - jasnell@us.ibm.com
These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have peace.
In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the
world.
- John 16:33
Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org
To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject: transports & wsdl
It seems like if a WSDL doc had:
<binding name="StockQuoteSoapBinding" type="tns:StockQuotePortType">
<soap:binding style="document"
transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
then the "transport" attribute should trigger Axis to look for
a transport chain that matches. Anyone disagree?
Should it just look for a transport chain with that name or
should handlers have QName associated with 'em? Or perhaps
the QName could just be an "option". Thoughts?
-Dug
|