axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tim Buss (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (AXIS2-2246) Rpc-Literal Client and Server adb codegen create messages that are non WS-I complient
Date Tue, 17 Apr 2007 07:21:15 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-2246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12489328
] 

Tim Buss commented on AXIS2-2246:
---------------------------------

yes I saw it work for the 1.1.1 snapshot but I have not yet managed to get it to work uisng
the 1.2 snapshot using the same  WSDL. so I just wanted to be sure the fix had made it into
the 1.2 branch.  I was wrking on this today so I should know for sure tomorrow.  It may  be
to do with test I am using.  Something that worked with Axis 1.X but probably shouldn't have.

> Rpc-Literal Client and Server adb codegen create messages that are non WS-I complient

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AXIS2-2246
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-2246
>             Project: Axis 2.0 (Axis2)
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: adb
>    Affects Versions: 1.1.1
>         Environment: Axis 1.5, Tomcat 5.5, Axis2 1.1.1, Axis2 Eclipse codegen plugin
1.1.1, Eclipse 3.2, WTP 1.5.1, Windows 2003 server
>            Reporter: Tim Buss
>            Priority: Critical
>         Attachments: Axis2RPCLiteralTest.wsdl
>
>
> There appears to be two problems.  The most obvious is that the RPC-literal message sent
by the generated client and accepted by the generated service is incorrect .  The following
message body  is sent for the various test cases I have tried - string, complex type, nested
complex type. 
> <soapenv:Body> 
>     <ns:OperationName> 
>         <ns:PartName> 
> .............content..... 
>         </ns:PartName> 
>     </ns:OperationName> 
> </soapenv:Body> 
> but it should be: 
> <soapenv:Body> 
>     <ns:OperationName> 
>         <PartName> 
> .............content..... 
>         </PartName> 
>     </ns:OperationName> 
> </soapenv:Body> 
> PartName should be a non qualified name.  Axis 1.3 did it this way, and other sources
support this as being the correct form for rpc-literal.  In particualr WS-I Basic 1.0 states:

> "4.7.20 Part Accessors 
> For rpc-literal envelopes, WSDL 1.1 is not clear what namespace, if any, the accessor
elements for parameters and return value are a part of. Different implementations make different
choices, leading to interoperability problems. 
> R2735 An ENVELOPE described with an rpc-literal binding MUST place the part accessor
elements for parameters and return value in no namespace. 
> R2755 The part accessor elements in a MESSAGE described with an rpc-literal binding MUST
have a local name of the same value as the name attribute of the corresponding wsdl:part element.

> Settling on one alternative is crucial to achieving interoperability. The Profile places
the part accessor elements in no namespace as doing so is simple, covers all cases, and does
not lead to logical inconsistency. " 
> http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.2.html 
> The second problem that I have yet to narrow down is that with a much more complex type,
the generated client sends a message with a body like this where the "part" element is not
present: 
> <soapenv:Body> 
>     <ns:OperationName> 
>  .............content..... 
>      </ns:OperationName> 
> </soapenv:Body> 
> One other difference that may be a factor in this case is that my complex service is
one way. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org


Mime
View raw message