tuscany-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Interface contract mapping and remote interfaces
Date Wed, 07 Jul 2010 09:01:44 GMT
I have some more comprehensive local changes for TUSCANY-3616 now and
needless to say this causes many of our tests to fail. Some of this is
legitimate where we just have the WSDL for the test wrong. Other cases
are different. There first one I've found is here [1]. The component.


Defines a Java operation as follows.

public OMElement getGreetings(OMElement om)

Which is described by a provided WSDL where the input and return types
of this operation are of type


The response from ?wsdl will therefore be sensible from the external
user point of view. However the WSDL generated from the Java for
matching purposes will describe the input and output values as

This would seem to be a special binding.ws case that Tuscany supports.
I.e. the ability to have a service process the raw message structure
while having the real service interface described through a provided
WSDL. It feels similar to the specified JMS binding behaviour where,
using the default wire format, a component can implement onMessage().

Assuming that this is true then I'll need to add a special case in the
matching logic.

[1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/itest/ws/endpoints/src/main/resources/org/apache/tuscany/sca/binding/ws/axis2/WSDLExplicitURI.composite


Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com

View raw message