cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Diephouse <>
Subject Re: parameter order in soap messages
Date Sat, 28 Oct 2006 20:15:22 GMT
I added a note to that issue - but I just wanted to bring it to the list 
so everyone saw: we really need to get rid of 
MessagePartInfo.isInSoapHeader Soon. Can anyone take a look at this 
issue soon?

- Dan

Freeman Fang wrote:

> Hi Peter,
> It's should be a bug of runtime, I have created a task on jira to 
> track this issue
> Thanks very much
> Freeman
> Peter Jones wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> I'm seeing a problem with parameter order in cxf, and just thought I'd
>> see if anyone else had any insights.
>> Somewhat related to CXF-161, I was messing around with a test wsdl and
>> added a parameterOrder attribute to an operation whose output message
>> contained both a header part and a response part.  Unfortunately, the
>> runtime doesn't quite work correctly when using parameterOrder.  (Often
>> cxf won't find the correct method to call on the server side in this
>> case).  The BareInInterceptor doesn't seem to account for the
>> parameterOrder list when putting together the parameter list which is
>> used to invoke on the server - it assumes header parts always come
>> after all other parameters.
>> I made a few changes in my tree to make sure the parameter list is 
>> correctly ordered and that seems to make sure the right method gets
>> invoked.
>> The problem I'm seeing now though is related to the return type.  In my
>> test wsdl, I left the return part unlisted but listed the header part in
>> the parameterOrder.
>> The issue seems to be that when WSDLServiceBuilder.buildMessage() runs
>> for the out message of the operation, the order for the parts it gets
>> is 1) header_part 2) return part (since header_part is in the paramOrder
>> list but the response part isn't).
>> Later, when the BareOutInterceptor.handleMessage() tries to write the
>> output arguments, the arguments are in the order 1) return 2) out 
>> parameters
>> (unfortunately not the same as the MessageParts order and so a problem).
>> Not sure if my description makes sense, but I just wanted to see if
>> I'm missing something here, or if anyone has any thoughts... :)
>> Cheers,
>> Peter

Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC

View raw message