Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 37245 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2007 21:43:50 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Apr 2007 21:43:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 51332 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2007 21:43:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-user-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 51307 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2007 21:43:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-user-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-user@ws.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-user@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 51296 invoked by uid 99); 22 Apr 2007 21:43:49 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:43:49 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [206.123.75.163] (HELO sosnoski.com) (206.123.75.163) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:43:41 -0700 Received: from [192.168.0.2] (ip-58-28-158-218.ubs-dsl.xnet.co.nz [58.28.158.218]) (authenticated bits=0) by sosnoski.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l3MLhGlm021538 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:43:19 -0400 Message-ID: <462BD6F4.8070907@sosnoski.com> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:43:16 +1200 From: Dennis Sosnoski User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: axis-user@ws.apache.org Subject: Re: Axis2 doc/wrapped service with many params References: <462BAE9D.80202@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: <462BAE9D.80202@gmx.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi Philipp, Both the order and the names of the parameters are supposed to matter in wrapped doc/lit, since this uses an to compose the parameter elements. With JiBX data binding the names definitely matter, as is also the case with XMLBeans; if ADB doesn't care about the names this seems like a significant error in the ADB code. - Dennis Dennis M. Sosnoski SOA and Web Services in Java Training and Consulting http://www.sosnoski.com - http://www.sosnoski.co.nz Seattle, WA +1-425-939-0576 - Wellington, NZ +64-4-298-6117 Philipp Leitner wrote: > Hi all, > > I just did a few experiements with an Axis2 service that I deployed. I > am using the doc/wrapped style, and have an operation that looks > something like this (in Java notation): > > > > public String concatSomeStuff(String param1, String param2, String > param3, int param4); > > > > The operation will just concatenate the parameters and return them as > String. > > Now I discovered that a SOAP request like this > > > 14 > Sperrgasse > Philipp Leitner > 111 > > > bears a different result then a request like > > > Sperrgasse > 14 > 111 > Philipp Leitner > > > (note the different order of the parameters). > > Meanwhile, the actual /name/ of the parameters does not seem to > matter. A request like > > > Sperrgasse > 14 > 111 > Philipp Leitner > > > still works. > > Is this really how Axis2 (or doc-style SOAP in general) is supposed to > work? The order of the parameters is important, while the name is not > important? For some reason I always figured it should be the other way > 'round. > > Can somebody shed some light on this issue? > > /philipp > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-user-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: axis-user-help@ws.apache.org