cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Schneider <>
Subject Re: New Howto: Defining Contract first webservices with wsdl generation from java
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:05:06 GMT
Hi Adrian,
>> Hi Adrian,
>> first thanks for your comments. I apreciate your help. I know it is 
>> possible to configure these things and I will add the description of 
>> how to do this.
> Sounds good. My motivation behind this is simply that the default 
> naming schemes used in JAX-WS to WSDL mapping, when put through other 
> WSDL-to-* code generators, can generate code that is awkward to use.
Do you have some first hand experiences what things do or do not work? I 
would be very interested in building WSDLs with my attempt that work on 
a wide range of platforms.
>> The other thing with service endpoints is that we have different 
>> servers for develop, test and production. So one address in the wsdl 
>> would be no help. Do you have any idea how to handle this? Currently 
>> we configure the jms or http server address in a config file for the 
>> deployment so the admin can adjust it at runtime.
> I'm all for services having a good logical QName, like 
> {}/MyService that is the same regardless of 
> whether you're in production, test or development. In terms of your 
> naming strategy for endpoints (ports), you could have a separate port 
> for each of your production, test and dev instances. I prefer to use a 
> naming strategy that describes the binding and transport, for example, 
> "SOAPOverHTTP" or "XMLOverJMS" as I think it better describes what the 
> port actually is.
> As for the actual address information, I think that just shouldn't be 
> in the WSDL at all! I prefer to put a simple placeholder in the 
> addressing information, that I can then override (as you do!) from 
> configuration in a properties file or some other configuration system. 
> The placeholder could just be an empty URL; one approach that I have 
> seen is that the default URL points to a stub or mock services hosted 
> somewhere in system test: this means that new users who want to play 
> with the service can do so very easily without risking breakage.
Using a mock service in the address is a very good idea. Perhaps we 
could start a page in the Wiki with best practices for binding, service 
and port. I think these are the parts of a wsdl people are most unsure 
how to use.

Best regards



Christian Schneider

View raw message