In SOAP headers it should be an element with name uuid, which has an
attribute wsa:isReferenceParameter. This attribute declares that it is
the ReferenceParameter. Do you see it there?
Dňa 19.02.2015 o 20:10 Daniel Kulp [via CXF] napísal(a):
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 1:12 PM, Erich Duda <[hidden email]
</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5754490&i=0>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> thank you for your comments. I fixed mentioned issues, see comments
bellow.
>
> Dňa 13.02.2015 o 21:23 Daniel Kulp napísal(a):
>>> On Feb 12, 2015, at 3:03 PM, dudae<[hidden email]
</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5754490&i=1>> wrote:
>>> Do you check the implementation? Could you give me some feedback
please?
>>> Thank you.
>> Just took a quick look at this… I completely forgot about this.
>>
>> There are a couple of obvious things that “jump out” that are very
quick/easy to fix. Mostly removing the @author tags (highly
discouraged at Apache) and there are a few files that need the Apache
header added (the XML files). There are also several warnings when
pulled into Eclipse, but those aren’t big deals at all. The other
issue would be the use of the System.out for all the messages during
the tests causing a lot of output on the console. Again, easy fix
and I understand why it’s there during development.
>
> Should I fixed all PMD warnings? For example, "A method should have
only one exit point, and that should be the last statement in the
method". I think that more exit points (return statements) do some
methods more readable.
No. The PMD that is run when you type “mvn” on the command line is
the important one. Ideally, they’d both be the same but the current
eclipse plugin has a bunch of issues. I have a few pull requests open
with the PMD folks that should get the eclipse pmd plugin to be more
usable for CXF.
>
>> The main thing that jumps out at me as being problematic is the use
of the JAX-WS handlers (org.apache.cxf.ws.transfer.shared.handlers).
Those cause problems as we have to completely break streaming to build
the SOAPMessage that is passed into those. I’d very strongly
encourage flipping those to normal CXF SOAP interceptors. They seem
to only operate on SOAP headers so they can call the getHeaders method
on the SOAPMessage passed into the interceptor and pretty much allow
the body to remain as is. (likely streaming) That said, I’m not
sure those are even needed. CXF’s MAPCodec.java already gathers the
headers that have the ReferenceParameter attribute and adds them to
the “To” EndpointReference. You may need to experiment a bit more to
see if they are really getting through (and if not, figure out why).
Likewise, on the client, you could directly add them to the client
RequestContext via the normal way of adding headers:
>>
>>
http://cxf.apache.org/faq.html#FAQ-HowcanIaddsoapheaderstotherequest/response?
>>
>> and avoid the JAX-WS handler/interceptor entirely.
>
> The ReferenceParameter is possible to send through the request
context. When I tried to send it through the standard headers, it
isn't getting through because MAPCodec removes all WS-Addressing
headers (see discardMAPs method).
The discardMAPs method only discards headers that are in the
WS-Addressing namespace. It shouldn’t discard the elements that are
not in the ws-addressing namespace. If I add a
factory.getFeatures().add(new LoggingFeature()) to your code (or use
wireshark), I’m not seeing the reference params being written out at
all with the new code. That kind of bothers me as I believe they
should. Hmm…. Can you double check that the soap headers you are
expecting to be there are really there?
> Few more CXF things:
>> In XLSTResourceTransformer and TransferTools and a few other
places, you are creating DocumentBuilderFactory/DocumentBuilder and a
Transformer and such. You really should use the utility methods we
have in StaxUtils, XMLUtils, and XSLTUtils for much of that. We try
to make sure all the XML parsing and processing goes through those
utilities so that we can control various aspects to prevent various
attacks (like entity expansion attacks).
>
> I removed TransferTools. I use for
> - parsing, serializing XML - StaxUtils
> - creating elements - DOMUtils.createDocument().createElement
> - transforming - XSLTUtils
> - xpath - XPathUtils
>
> However in FragmentDialectLanguageXPath10 I don't use the
XPathUtils, because I need to recognize, when the XPath throw the
exception and when not. See https://www.java.net/node/681793
OK. That works. Looks much better.
I think if we just double check the reference params things, we’re
likely good to go with it.
--
Daniel Kulp
[hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5754490&i=2> -
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Proposal-WS-Transfer-WS-Fragment-implementation-tp5750975p5754490.html
To unsubscribe from [Proposal] WS-Transfer/WS-Fragment implementation,
click here
<http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=5750975&code=ZHVkYWVyaWNoQGdtYWlsLmNvbXw1NzUwOTc1fC0xOTc5NzM2MTA0>.
NAML
<http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
Erich
