axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 16339] New: - Axis WSDL Support Issue: WSDL SOAP Binding vs. SOAP RPC
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2003 17:47:20 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16339>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16339

Axis WSDL Support Issue: WSDL SOAP Binding vs. SOAP RPC

           Summary: Axis WSDL Support Issue: WSDL SOAP Binding vs. SOAP RPC
           Product: Axis
           Version: 1.1beta
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: Other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: Major
          Priority: Other
         Component: Serialization/Deserialization
        AssignedTo: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
        ReportedBy: jasnell@us.ibm.com


Currently, when initializing an org.apache.axis.client.Service object
using a WSDL document, the method return part in the WSDL message
definition MUST be named exactly the same as the element in the returned
SOAP Envelope that contains the return value or else Axis will throw an
error while parsing the return (because Axis serialization uses the WSDL
part definition to figure out which QName to look for).... the error is
thrown because Axis cannot find the element containing the return value.

While this is sufficient to satisify the WSDL specification constraint
expressed in Section 3.5: "Each message part (parameter) appears under the
wrapper, represented by an accessor named identically to the corresponding
parameter of the call. Parts are arranged in the same order as the
parameters of the call", it does cause somewhat of a conflict with the
SOAP specification RPC binding which states in Section 7.1 "The name of
the return value accessor is not significant".
The behavior of the deserialization process should be changed to the
following:

1. First, attempt to find the return element using the WSDL message part
definition.
2. If the return element cannot be found (e.g. when the name of the return
element in the SOAP message does not equal the name of the return part in
the WSDL message definition), then use the first child element as the
return element.

Doing so will satisify both the WSDL and SOAP spec constraints.

Mime
View raw message