Not trying to criticize the good work that is being done with Seam, but just curious as ever: can anyone comment on the choice to add a conversationId element in the Soap header? This is documented as: anonymous wrote : So how are conversations propagated between web service requests? Seam uses a SOAP header element present in both the SOAP request and response messages to carry the conversation ID from the consumer to the service, and back again. The downside is: anonymous wrote : Unfortunately, because web services may be consumed by a variety of web service clients written in a variety of languages, it is up to the developer to implement conversation ID propagation between individual web services that are intended to be used within the scope of a single conversation.
The Sun JAX-WS reference implementation supports statefull web services by using a different endpoint reference for each client. The good thing about this is that, for example, .NET 3.0 clients seem to support this out of the box as well. It seems JBossWS 2.1 supports this through WS-Adressing as well; for example JBoss' Heiko Braun wrote: "WS-Addressing is the right way to build conversational web services". Someone's question in the WS forum about future support for StatefulWebServiceManager has not yet been answered: JBossWS JAX-WS question using stateful. I cannot find any reference to this in JIRA either. Thanks, Arjan. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4058028#4058028 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4058028 _______________________________________________ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
