Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

On 9/9/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Simon Nash wrote:
>
> > (cut)
> >>
> >>> We can't get that done by our 1.0 though so need something for now.
> >>> We're
> >>> not planing on attempting to pass the jaxws tck so i'd be happy if we
> >>> just
> >>> have something that works even if we suspect it may not be fully jaxws
> >>> compliant as long as Tuscany services and references can talk to each
> >>> other
> >>> or to native axis2 clients and services. So i still quite like the
> >>> fix that
> >>> Simon L proposed early on in this thread.
> >>>
> >>>...ant
> >>>
> >> I have now got my test case working to show Tuscany services and
> >> references talking to each other using an augmented version of the
> >> WSDL generated by Axis2 Java2WSDL (hand edited currently) with an
> >> empty wrapper for the no parameters case.  There's a small fix
> >> needed in the databinding framework to deal with void return types
> >> when there are no parameters.  I have a patch and I'll post it soon.
> >>
> >> The next step is to see whether this works for Tuscany services and
> >> references talking to native Axis2 clients and services.  I'll look
> >> into this later and post my findings tomorrow.
> >>
> > I spent a while playing with this without making a lot of progress.
> > The ADB stubs gererated by Axis2's WSDL2Java are not the easiest to
> > decipher!  Then I came across a very useful example/tutorial in the
> > Axis2 documentation (see [1]) that shows "wrapped no parameter" style
> > WSDL being used with Axis2's WSDL2Java to generate clients for ADB,
> > XMLBeans, and JiBX.  This was very encouraging as it provides some
> > confirmation that "wrapped no parameter" style WSDL is valid for Axis2.
> >
> > I'm now working through the steps in this tutorial to take this form
> > of  "wrapped no parameter" WSDL and create an Axis2 client that talks
> > to a Tuscany service that uses the same WSDL.  If successful, this
> > will confirm that having an empty wrapper element in generated WSDL
> > on the Tuscany service side doesn't cause any problems when an Axis2
> > client is talking to these Tuscany services.
> >
> I can now confirm that calls from a pure Axis2 client to a Tuscany
> service do work with "wrapped no parameter" WSDL.  Given that there
> isn't an interoperability issue, I think we should postprocess the
> Axis2-generated WSDL to add these "no parameter" wrappers when needed.
>
> Does anyone disagree with this?  If not, I will work on a patch.


I still think you should talk to the Axis2 guys before patching the wsdl as
it may be just something we're doing wrong with setting up Axis2. Or if
there is a bug maybe its fixed in Axis2 1.3 or there's a Axis2 fix we could
port to the code we use.

   ...ant

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

Simon Nash wrote:


(cut)


We can't get that done by our 1.0 though so need something for now. 
We're
not planing on attempting to pass the jaxws tck so i'd be happy if we 
just

have something that works even if we suspect it may not be fully jaxws
compliant as long as Tuscany services and references can talk to each 
other
or to native axis2 clients and services. So i still quite like the 
fix that

Simon L proposed early on in this thread.

   ...ant


I have now got my test case working to show Tuscany services and
references talking to each other using an augmented version of the
WSDL generated by Axis2 Java2WSDL (hand edited currently) with an
empty wrapper for the no parameters case.  There's a small fix
needed in the databinding framework to deal with void return types
when there are no parameters.  I have a patch and I'll post it soon.

The next step is to see whether this works for Tuscany services and
references talking to native Axis2 clients and services.  I'll look
into this later and post my findings tomorrow.


I spent a while playing with this without making a lot of progress.
The ADB stubs gererated by Axis2's WSDL2Java are not the easiest to
decipher!  Then I came across a very useful example/tutorial in the
Axis2 documentation (see [1]) that shows "wrapped no parameter" style
WSDL being used with Axis2's WSDL2Java to generate clients for ADB,
XMLBeans, and JiBX.  This was very encouraging as it provides some
confirmation that "wrapped no parameter" style WSDL is valid for Axis2.

I'm now working through the steps in this tutorial to take this form
of  "wrapped no parameter" WSDL and create an Axis2 client that talks
to a Tuscany service that uses the same WSDL.  If successful, this
will confirm that having an empty wrapper element in generated WSDL
on the Tuscany service side doesn't cause any problems when an Axis2
client is talking to these Tuscany services.


I can now confirm that calls from a pure Axis2 client to a Tuscany
service do work with "wrapped no parameter" WSDL.  Given that there
isn't an interoperability issue, I think we should postprocess the
Axis2-generated WSDL to add these "no parameter" wrappers when needed.

Does anyone disagree with this?  If not, I will work on a patch.

  Simon


For the opposite case of Tuscany clients talking to Axis2 services,
we need to make sure that Tuscany can support the "empty body"
style of wrapped WSDL that's generated by Axis2's Java2WSDL.  For
this support, we'll need the fix that SimonL has produced.

I also looked at the code generated by Java2WSDL in CXF and wsgen
in JDK 6. (wsgen is JDK 6's Java to WSDL generator).  Both of these
generate the empty wrapper element for the no parameters case, so it
does rather look like it's Axis2 that's out of step here.

  Simon

[1] 
http://ws.apache.org/axis2/1_3/userguide-creatingclients.html#createclients







-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

See inline.

  Simon

Simon Nash wrote:


See inline.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:


On 9/5/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]

[1]



http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html


On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:


[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:


I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

   
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
   attributeFormDefault="qualified"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
   targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   



I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?

I have the following two questions:
1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is



no


"foo" element to carry it)?

2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question



(1).


Thanks



OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.

I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2



for


now, as:
(a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be



generated


by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
(b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as



it


won't introduce any other side effects

I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track



this


bug.

--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/6/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> See inline.
>
>Simon
>
> ant elder wrote:
>
> > On 9/5/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
> >>>wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]
> >>>
> >>>[1]
> >>
> >>http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html
> >>
> >>>On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> 
> >[snip]
> >Simon Laws wrote:
> >
> >>I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> >>
> >>String foo()
> >>
> >>Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> >>
> >>
> >>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> >>attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> >>elementFormDefault="qualified"
> >>targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >>type="xs:string" />
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> >- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> >- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?
> >
> >I have the following two questions:
> >1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
> >doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is
> >>
> >>no
> >>
> >"foo" element to carry it)?
> >
> >2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
> >binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question
> >>>
> >>>(1).
> >>>
> >Thanks
> >
> 
> OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
> should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.
> 
> I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2
> >>
> >>for
> >>
> now, as:
> (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be
> >>
> >>generated
> >>
> by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
> (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
> worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as
> >>
> >>it
> >>
> won't introduce any other side effects
> 
> I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track
> >>
> >>this
> >>
> bug.
> 
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>Luciano Resende
> >>>Apache Tuscany Committer
> >>>http://people.apache.org/~lresende <
> http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende
> >>>
> >>>http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >>>
> >>>-
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>
> >>>So several  points coming out here. Let me try and catch them (in no
> >>
> >>particular order)
> >>
> >>Issue1 - we have more than one piece of code in Tuscany that generates
> >>WSDL
> >>(using underlying Axis2 tools but possibly in different ways)
> >>Solution
> >>   Do WSDL generation in one place.
> >>
> >>Issue2 - The WSDL that is generated doesn't match the JAX-WS definition
> of
> >>wrapped which we have set out to support
> >>Solution1
> >>   get Axis to fix it
> >>Solution2 (stop gap)
> >>   post process the generated WSDL to correct it for Tuscany
> >>
> >>Issue3 - Service providers and consumer outside of Tuscany may generate
> >>broken WSDL and reasonably expect their messages to work with Tuscany
> >>Solution
> >>   There is a fix available to make inbound Axis2 processing lax to the
> >>extent that it handlse Axis2 version of a null parameter operation
> >>   A fix is required for void return values
> >>
> >>It sounds like
> >>
> >>We could address Issue1 if it's possible
> >>- need Luciano/Ant to say if this is possible and/or worth it
> >>
> >>We should address Issue2 Solution 1
> >>- well get it moving at least
> >>
> >>We could address Issue2 Solution2
> >>   - I quite like the idea of producing the correct WSDL  as we see it
> but
> >>there is concern that we don't know if it we will break someone who
> relies
> >>on the WSDL the way axis produces it. This makes the assumption that it
> >>works for more people in its current form that it does in it's fixed up
> >>form. Which in turn is based on people being happy using Axis2. Warrants
> a
> >>bit of investigation.
> >>
> >>We should address Issue3
> >
>

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

See inline.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:


On 9/5/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]

[1]


http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html


On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:


[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:


I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

   
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
   attributeFormDefault="qualified"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
   targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   



I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?

I have the following two questions:
1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is


no


"foo" element to carry it)?

2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question


(1).


Thanks



OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.

I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2


for


now, as:
(a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be


generated


by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
(b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as


it


won't introduce any other side effects

I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track


this


bug.

--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

On 9/5/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
> > wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]
> >
> > [1]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html
> >
> > On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > > > [snip]
> > > > Simon Laws wrote:
> > > >> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> > > >>
> > > >> String foo()
> > > >>
> > > >> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> > > >>
> > > >> 
> > > >> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> > > >> attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> > > >> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> > > >> targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >>  > > >> type="xs:string" />
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> > > > - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> > > > - or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?
> > > >
> > > > I have the following two questions:
> > > > 1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
> > > > doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is
> no
> >
> > > > "foo" element to carry it)?
> > > >
> > > > 2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
> > > > binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question
> > (1).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > >
> > > OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
> > > should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.
> > >
> > > I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2
> for
> > > now, as:
> > > (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be
> generated
> > > by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
> > > (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
> > > worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as
> it
> > > won't introduce any other side effects
> > >
> > > I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track
> this
> > > bug.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Sebastien
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > Apache Tuscany Committer
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende  >
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > So several  points coming out here. Let me try and catch them (in no
> particular order)
>
> Issue1 - we have more than one piece of code in Tuscany that generates
> WSDL
> (using underlying Axis2 tools but possibly in different ways)
> Solution
>Do WSDL generation in one place.
>
> Issue2 - The WSDL that is generated doesn't match the JAX-WS definition of
> wrapped which we have set out to support
> Solution1
>get Axis to fix it
> Solution2 (stop gap)
>post process the generated WSDL to correct it for Tuscany
>
> Issue3 - Service providers and consumer outside of Tuscany may generate
> broken WSDL and reasonably expect their messages to work with Tuscany
> Solution
>There is a fix available to make inbound Axis2 processing lax to the
> extent that it handlse Axis2 version of a null parameter operation
>A fix is required for void return values
>
> It sounds like
>
> We could address Issue1 if it's possible
> - need Luciano/Ant to say if this is possible and/or worth it
>
> We should address Issue2 Solution 1
> - well get it moving at least
>
> We could address Issue2 Solution2
>- I quite like the idea of producing the correct WSDL  as we see it but
> there is concern that we don't know if it we will break someone who relies
> on the WSDL the way axis produces it. This makes the assumption that it
> works for more people in its current form that it does in it's fixed up
> form. Which in turn is based on people being happy using Axis2. Warrants a
> bit of investigation.
>
> We should address Issue3


I agree this should be brought up with the Axis2 guys before we go ahead and
try to patch the wsdl. Maybe there is some reason its this way, maybe there
is some option we're not using to get the wsdl the way we want. Axis2 has
passed the JAXWS TCK and its had lots of interop testing and fixing d

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

Simon Laws wrote:


On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]

[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html

On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:


[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:


I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

   
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
   attributeFormDefault="qualified"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
   targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   



I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?

I have the following two questions:
1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no



"foo" element to carry it)?

2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question


(1).


Thanks



OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.

I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for
now, as:
(a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated
by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
(b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it
won't introduce any other side effects

I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this
bug.

--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende 
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

So several  points coming out here. Let me try and catch them (in no


particular order)

Issue1 - we have more than one piece of code in Tuscany that generates WSDL
(using underlying Axis2 tools but possibly in different ways)
 Solution
   Do WSDL generation in one place.

Issue2 - The WSDL that is generated doesn't match the JAX-WS definition of
wrapped which we have set out to support
 Solution1
   get Axis to fix it
 Solution2 (stop gap)
   post process the generated WSDL to correct it for Tuscany

Issue3 - Service providers and consumer outside of Tuscany may generate
broken WSDL and reasonably expect their messages to work with Tuscany
Solution
   There is a fix available to make inbound Axis2 processing lax to the
extent that it handlse Axis2 version of a null parameter operation
   A fix is required for void return values

It sounds like

We could address Issue1 if it's possible
- need Luciano/Ant to say if this is possible and/or worth it

We should address Issue2 Solution 1
- well get it moving at least

We could address Issue2 Solution2
   - I quite like the idea of producing the correct WSDL  as we see it but
there is concern that we don't know if it we will break someone who relies
on the WSDL the way axis produces it. This makes the assumption that it
works for more people in its current form that it does in it's fixed up
form. Which in turn is based on people being happy using Axis2. Warrants a
bit of investigation.


This sounds a bit like "maybe we should do this wrong because there is
one (at least) buggy implementation out there that could be broken if
we do it right".

I was really hoping that we would be able to avoid debating this point
if Axis2 could handle the "right" form of WSDL.  But my first experiment
in calling a no-argument method using hand-edited explicit WSDL with the
recommended wrapper style and soap:action has not succeeded.  I'm too
tired now to figure out whether it's me or Axis2 doing something wrong,
so I'll resume my investigations in the morning.

  Simon


We should address Issue3

Simon





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

I agree that interoperability is important, not just with Axis2 but
also with other Web Service stacks out there.

The best guide to industry standard Web Service interoperability
that I am aware of is the WS-I Basic Profile.

If we send an empty body in the case of a no-argument Java method
(as this form of WSDL would imply), and if more than one method on a
service interface can have a no-argument signature, then this would
violate the following requirement for WS-I interoperabilty:

 R2710  The operations in a wsdl:binding in a DESCRIPTION MUST result
 in operation signatures that are different from one another.

If we (or the Axis2 runtime) rely on the soap:action to disambiguate
these operations (as was suggested in a previous post to this thread),
then this would violate the following WS-I requirement:

 R1127  A RECEIVER MUST NOT rely on the value of the SOAPAction HTTP
 header to correctly process the message. [SOAP12]

However if we are using WS-Addressing then it would be valid from a
WS-I perspective to use wsa:Action to disambiguate the operations.
We are using parts of WS-Addressing but I don't think we are currently
fully compliant.

I'm doing further investigation into how Axis2 disambiguates the case
of two different service operations without arguments that are both
mapped to an empty body in the SOAP message.  If anyone can give me a
pointer to the relevant code, it would be much appreciated.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:


But doesn't that mean we're not going to work with wsdl generated by Axis2
tooling (and likely others) and all the existing services using that wsdl
and returning it with ?wsdl.

Its even debatable the wsdl is "wrong" as wrapped style has been used long
before jaxws came along but never precisely defined in any spec. I'd still
prefer we just make Tuscany tolerant of it than try to fiddle about changing
the wsdl that people are trying to use.

   ...ant

On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.

Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.

I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:



On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Hi,

The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
style.
There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the


operation



name:

input
  --- message
  --- part (only one part)
  --- element (the element name should be the same as


the



operation name)

The element should look like this:


  
   
  


Thanks,
Raymond

- Original Message -
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "tuscany-dev" 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?





There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
"wrapped"
style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
(




http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java


)

The code is currently

 public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
 if (wrapperStyle == null) {
 wrapperStyle =
 wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
 .getOutputChildElements() != null);
 }
 return wrapperStyle;
 }

Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out


what it



means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.

Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate


WSDL



for a method with the signature

String myMethod()

And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.

Simon




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no


parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty


sequence




  
   
  


And have this as the single input type. I'm de

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Luciano Resende]

In the case I'm investigating, the issue is around checking if the
wrapper style is in use for the wsdl, but the problem is that
wsdl2java generates wrong interfaces for the wsdl in question.

On 9/5/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
> > wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]
> >
> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html
> >
> > On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > > > [snip]
> > > > Simon Laws wrote:
> > > >> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> > > >>
> > > >> String foo()
> > > >>
> > > >> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> > > >>
> > > >> 
> > > >> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> > > >> attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> > > >> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> > > >> targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >>  > > >> type="xs:string" />
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> > > > - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> > > > - or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?
> > > >
> > > > I have the following two questions:
> > > > 1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
> > > > doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no
> >
> > > > "foo" element to carry it)?
> > > >
> > > > 2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
> > > > binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question
> > (1).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > >
> > > OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
> > > should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.
> > >
> > > I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for
> > > now, as:
> > > (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated
> > > by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
> > > (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
> > > worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it
> > > won't introduce any other side effects
> > >
> > > I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this
> > > bug.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Sebastien
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > Apache Tuscany Committer
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende 
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > So several  points coming out here. Let me try and catch them (in no
> particular order)
>
> Issue1 - we have more than one piece of code in Tuscany that generates WSDL
> (using underlying Axis2 tools but possibly in different ways)
>  Solution
>Do WSDL generation in one place.
>
> Issue2 - The WSDL that is generated doesn't match the JAX-WS definition of
> wrapped which we have set out to support
>  Solution1
>get Axis to fix it
>  Solution2 (stop gap)
>post process the generated WSDL to correct it for Tuscany
>
> Issue3 - Service providers and consumer outside of Tuscany may generate
> broken WSDL and reasonably expect their messages to work with Tuscany
> Solution
>There is a fix available to make inbound Axis2 processing lax to the
> extent that it handlse Axis2 version of a null parameter operation
>A fix is required for void return values
>
> It sounds like
>
> We could address Issue1 if it's possible
> - need Luciano/Ant to say if this is possible and/or worth it
>
> We should address Issue2 Solution 1
> - well get it moving at least
>
> We could address Issue2 Solution2
>- I quite like the idea of producing the correct WSDL  as we see it but
> there is concern that we don't know if it we will break someone who relies
> on the WSDL the way axis produces it. This makes the assumption that it
> works for more people in its current form that it does in it's fixed up
> form. Which in turn is based on people being happy using Axis2. Warrants a
> bit of investigation.
>
> We should address Issue3
>
> Simon
>


-- 
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.co

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
> wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]
>
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html
>
> On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > Simon Laws wrote:
> > >> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> > >>
> > >> String foo()
> > >>
> > >> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> > >> attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> > >> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> > >> targetNamespace=" http://test/xsd";>
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>  > >> type="xs:string" />
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> > > - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> > > - or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?
> > >
> > > I have the following two questions:
> > > 1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
> > > doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no
>
> > > "foo" element to carry it)?
> > >
> > > 2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
> > > binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question
> (1).
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
> > OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
> > should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.
> >
> > I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for
> > now, as:
> > (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated
> > by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
> > (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
> > worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it
> > won't introduce any other side effects
> >
> > I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this
> > bug.
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Sebastien
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> Apache Tuscany Committer
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende 
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So several  points coming out here. Let me try and catch them (in no
particular order)

Issue1 - we have more than one piece of code in Tuscany that generates WSDL
(using underlying Axis2 tools but possibly in different ways)
 Solution
   Do WSDL generation in one place.

Issue2 - The WSDL that is generated doesn't match the JAX-WS definition of
wrapped which we have set out to support
 Solution1
   get Axis to fix it
 Solution2 (stop gap)
   post process the generated WSDL to correct it for Tuscany

Issue3 - Service providers and consumer outside of Tuscany may generate
broken WSDL and reasonably expect their messages to work with Tuscany
Solution
   There is a fix available to make inbound Axis2 processing lax to the
extent that it handlse Axis2 version of a null parameter operation
   A fix is required for void return values

It sounds like

We could address Issue1 if it's possible
- need Luciano/Ant to say if this is possible and/or worth it

We should address Issue2 Solution 1
- well get it moving at least

We could address Issue2 Solution2
   - I quite like the idea of producing the correct WSDL  as we see it but
there is concern that we don't know if it we will break someone who relies
on the WSDL the way axis produces it. This makes the assumption that it
works for more people in its current form that it does in it's fixed up
form. Which in turn is based on people being happy using Axis2. Warrants a
bit of investigation.

We should address Issue3

Simon

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Luciano Resende]

Note that we have a similar issue that I'm looking at under the
wsdl2java tooling, described in this post [1]

[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev%40ws.apache.org/msg22726.html

On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > [snip]
> > Simon Laws wrote:
> >> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> >>
> >> String foo()
> >>
> >> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> >>
> >> 
> >> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> >> attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> >> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> >> targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  >> type="xs:string" />
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> > - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> > - or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?
> >
> > I have the following two questions:
> > 1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it
> > doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no
> > "foo" element to carry it)?
> >
> > 2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated
> > binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question (1).
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I
> should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.
>
> I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for
> now, as:
> (a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated
> by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
> (b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not
> worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it
> won't introduce any other side effects
>
> I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this
> bug.
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


-- 
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Jean-Sebastien Delfino]

Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:

[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:

I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates


http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
attributeFormDefault="qualified" 
elementFormDefault="qualified"

targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>














  


I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?

I have the following two questions:
1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it 
doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no 
"foo" element to carry it)?


2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated 
binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question (1).


Thanks



OK, looks like the answer to your question was already in your post, I 
should have read it better. In this case, it works with SOAP action.


I think it's better to tolerate that (incorrect) behavior from Axis2 for 
now, as:
(a) I don't think we'll be able to patch all WSDLs that may be generated 
by users with the Axis2 tools out of our control
(b) this is a workaround anyway, and a "tolerating" workaround is not 
worse than a "patching" workaround, actually it is probably better as it 
won't introduce any other side effects


I also think that we need to open an Axis2 JIRA to report and track this 
bug.


--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> >
> > I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> >
> >> - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
> >>
> >
> >
> > Is it really just the wsdl that Axis2 (1.2) generates?  What about
> anyone
> > using an existing wsdl that is wrapped style but may not precisely match
> the
> > jaxws definition of wrapped?
> >
> >...ant
> >
> >
>
> Do you have a specific WSDL pattern in mind?
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> This was the WSDL from the axis2 java2wsdl tool.

http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap12/";
xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/";
xmlns:mime="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/mime/";
xmlns:wsdl="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/";
xmlns:http="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/http/";
xmlns:ns="http://test/xsd"; xmlns:axis2="http://test";
targetNamespace="http://test";>

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
attributeFormDefault="qualified" elementFormDefault="qualified"
targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>















http://www.w3.org/2006/05/addressing/wsdl";
wsaw:Action="urn:foo" message="axis2:fooMessage" />
http://www.w3.org/2006/05/addressing/wsdl";
message="axis2:fooResponseMessage" wsaw:Action="urn:foo" />



http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http";
style="document" />











http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http";
style="document" />












http://localhost:8080/axis2/services/TestService";
/>


http://localhost:8080/axis2/services/TestService";
/>




Simon

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Jean-Sebastien Delfino]

ant elder wrote:

On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
  

- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?




Is it really just the wsdl that Axis2 (1.2) generates?  What about anyone
using an existing wsdl that is wrapped style but may not precisely match the
jaxws definition of wrapped?

   ...ant

  


Do you have a specific WSDL pattern in mind?

--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

On 9/5/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
> - tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?


Is it really just the wsdl that Axis2 (1.2) generates?  What about anyone
using an existing wsdl that is wrapped style but may not precisely match the
jaxws definition of wrapped?

   ...ant

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Jean-Sebastien Delfino]

[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:

I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates


http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
attributeFormDefault="qualified" elementFormDefault="qualified"
targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>














  


I'm trying to understand the overall picture before choosing a side:
- tolerate what Axis2 generates in our isWrapped() algorithm?
- or fix the WSDL after it's generated by Axis2?

I have the following two questions:
1) Is it true that the above WSDL has no chance to work at all as it 
doesn't allow the "foo" operation to be sent at all (since there is no 
"foo" element to carry it)?


2) Could you please paste the entire WSDL? including the generated 
binding and service+port? I believe that it'll help answer question (1).


Thanks

--
Jean-Sebastien


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +1 to doing the fixup in one place, and rationalizing all the
> places where we generate WSDL.  I'd appreciate some pointers to
> where these are as I don't think I've found them all yet :-)
>
>Simon
>
> Simon Laws wrote:
>
> > On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
> >>the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
> >>direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
> >>Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.
> >>
> >>Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
> >>WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
> >>it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
> >>Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
> >>the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
> >>postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.
> >>
> >>I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.
> >>
> >>   Simon
> >>
> >>ant elder wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> >>>>>>style.
> >>>>>>There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> >>>>
> >>>>operation
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>name:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>input
> >>>>>>   --- message
> >>>>>>   --- part (only one part)
> >>>>>>   --- element (the element name should be the same as
> >>>>
> >>>>the
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>operation name)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The element should look like this:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Thanks,
> >>>>>>Raymond
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>- Original Message -
> >>>>>>From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>>>To: "tuscany-dev" 
> >>>>>>Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> >>>>>>Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> >>>>>>>"wrapped"
> >>>>>>>style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> >>>>>>>WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> >>>>>>>(
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>>>>)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>The code is currently
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>  public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >>>>>>>  if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >>>>>>>  wrapperStyle =
> >>>>>>>  wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> >>>>>>>operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >>>>>>>  .getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >>>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>>  return wrapperStyle;
> >>>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

But doesn't that mean we're not going to work with wsdl generated by Axis2
tooling (and likely others) and all the existing services using that wsdl
and returning it with ?wsdl.

Its even debatable the wsdl is "wrong" as wrapped style has been used long
before jaxws came along but never precisely defined in any spec. I'd still
prefer we just make Tuscany tolerant of it than try to fiddle about changing
the wsdl that people are trying to use.

   ...ant

On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
> the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
> direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
> Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.
>
> Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
> WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
> it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
> Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
> the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
> postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.
>
> I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.
>
>Simon
>
> ant elder wrote:
>
> > On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>>The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> >>>>style.
> >>>>There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> >>
> >>operation
> >>
> >>>>name:
> >>>>
> >>>>input
> >>>>--- message
> >>>>--- part (only one part)
> >>>>--- element (the element name should be the same as
> >>
> >>the
> >>
> >>>>operation name)
> >>>>
> >>>>The element should look like this:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks,
> >>>>Raymond
> >>>>
> >>>>- Original Message -
> >>>>From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>To: "tuscany-dev" 
> >>>>Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> >>>>Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> >>>>>"wrapped"
> >>>>>style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> >>>>>WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> >>>>>(
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>>)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The code is currently
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >>>>>   if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >>>>>   wrapperStyle =
> >>>>>   wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> >>>>>operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >>>>>   .getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >>>>>   }
> >>>>>   return wrapperStyle;
> >>>>>   }
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> >>>>>parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> >>>>
> >>>>what it
> >>>>
> >>>>>means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> >>>>
> >>>>WSDL
> >>>>
> >>>>>for a method with the signature
> >>>>>
> >>>>>String myMethod()
> >>>>>
> >>>>>And it's complaining that 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

+1 to doing the fixup in one place, and rationalizing all the
places where we generate WSDL.  I'd appreciate some pointers to
where these are as I don't think I've found them all yet :-)

  Simon

Simon Laws wrote:


On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.

Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.

I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:



On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Hi,

The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
style.
There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the


operation



name:

input
  --- message
  --- part (only one part)
  --- element (the element name should be the same as


the



operation name)

The element should look like this:


  
   
  


Thanks,
Raymond

- Original Message -
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "tuscany-dev" 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?





There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
"wrapped"
style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
(




http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java


)

The code is currently

 public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
 if (wrapperStyle == null) {
 wrapperStyle =
 wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
 .getOutputChildElements() != null);
 }
 return wrapperStyle;
 }

Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out


what it



means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.

Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate


WSDL



for a method with the signature

String myMethod()

And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.

Simon




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no


parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty


sequence




  
   
  


And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
looking for why this isn't the case.

Thanks Raymond

Simon



I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

  
  http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
  attributeFormDefault="qualified"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
  targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

So in our code when it comes to testing for wrapped it returns false
because
this doesn't match the algorithm that was presented earlier in this
thread,
i.e. there is no part of the input message corresponding to the message
name. So when you try this in Tuscany is throws an exception saying that
the
operation is not wrapped.

It would be inconvenient for us to not support operations with no
parameters. As the wsdl generation process assumes that the target
operations will be generated as wrapped operations here's what I did..

1/ Changed the isWrapperStyle  test (in WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl)


to


read.

  public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
  if (wrapperStyle == null) {
  wrapperStyle =
  (operation.getInput
().getMessage().getParts().values().size()
== 0 ||wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null) &&
  (operation.getOutput() == null ||
wrapper.getOutputChildElements() != null);
  }
  return wrapperStyle;
  }

I.e. I'm letting it pass if there are no input parts at all which I
believe
is valid according the the JAX-WS 2.0 spec

2/ 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/5/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
> the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
> direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
> Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.
>
> Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
> WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
> it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
> Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
> the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
> postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.
>
> I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.
>
>Simon
>
> ant elder wrote:
>
> > On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>>The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> >>>>style.
> >>>>There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> >>
> >>operation
> >>
> >>>>name:
> >>>>
> >>>>input
> >>>>--- message
> >>>>--- part (only one part)
> >>>>--- element (the element name should be the same as
> >>
> >>the
> >>
> >>>>operation name)
> >>>>
> >>>>The element should look like this:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks,
> >>>>Raymond
> >>>>
> >>>>- Original Message -
> >>>>From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>To: "tuscany-dev" 
> >>>>Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> >>>>Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> >>>>>"wrapped"
> >>>>>style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> >>>>>WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> >>>>>(
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>>)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The code is currently
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >>>>>   if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >>>>>   wrapperStyle =
> >>>>>   wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> >>>>>operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >>>>>   .getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >>>>>   }
> >>>>>   return wrapperStyle;
> >>>>>   }
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> >>>>>parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> >>>>
> >>>>what it
> >>>>
> >>>>>means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> >>>>
> >>>>WSDL
> >>>>
> >>>>>for a method with the signature
> >>>>>
> >>>>>String myMethod()
> >>>>>
> >>>>>And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Simon
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>-
> >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>
> >>>>What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Nash]

I have concerns about making the Tuscany code wrong to compensate for
the generated WSDL being wrong.  This feels like a step in the wrong
direction, and it won't allow non-Tuscany Web service clients to call
Tuscany services that use generated WSDL.

Instead, I'd prefer to have Tuscany postprocess the incorrect
WSDLDefinition returned by the Axis2 generator and fix it up so that
it's correct.  The seems much cleaner and more robust that having
Tuscany override parts of the Axis2 generator code.  If in future
the Axis2 code returns a correct WSDLDefinition, then the Tuscany
postprocessor can just pass it through unchanged.

I am willing to take on the task of implementing this.

  Simon

ant elder wrote:


On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Hi,

The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
style.
There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the


operation


name:

input
   --- message
   --- part (only one part)
   --- element (the element name should be the same as


the


operation name)

The element should look like this:


   

   


Thanks,
Raymond

- Original Message -
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "tuscany-dev" 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?




There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
"wrapped"
style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
(




http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java


)

The code is currently

  public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
  if (wrapperStyle == null) {
  wrapperStyle =
  wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
  .getOutputChildElements() != null);
  }
  return wrapperStyle;
  }

Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out


what it


means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.

Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate


WSDL


for a method with the signature

String myMethod()

And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.

Simon




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no


parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty


sequence




   

   


And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
looking for why this isn't the case.

Thanks Raymond

Simon



I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

   
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
   attributeFormDefault="qualified"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
   targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

So in our code when it comes to testing for wrapped it returns false
because
this doesn't match the algorithm that was presented earlier in this
thread,
i.e. there is no part of the input message corresponding to the message
name. So when you try this in Tuscany is throws an exception saying that
the
operation is not wrapped.

It would be inconvenient for us to not support operations with no
parameters. As the wsdl generation process assumes that the target
operations will be generated as wrapped operations here's what I did..

1/ Changed the isWrapperStyle  test (in WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl) to
read.

   public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
   if (wrapperStyle == null) {
   wrapperStyle =
   (operation.getInput
().getMessage().getParts().values().size()
== 0 ||wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null) &&
   (operation.getOutput() == null ||
wrapper.getOutputChildElements() != null);
   }
   return wrapperStyle;
   }

I.e. I'm letting it pass if there are no input parts at all which I
believe
is valid according the the JAX-WS 2.0 spec

2/ Fixed the getWrapperInfo method to take account of the case where there
are no input params

   if (in != null) {
   for (XmlSchemaElement e : getInputChildElements()) {
   inChildren.add(getElementInfo(e));
   }
  

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/5/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> > > > style.
> > > > There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> > operation
> > > > name:
> > > >
> > > > input
> > > > --- message
> > > > --- part (only one part)
> > > > --- element (the element name should be the same as
> > the
> > > > operation name)
> > > >
> > > > The element should look like this:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Raymond
> > > >
> > > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: "tuscany-dev" 
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> > > > Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > > > > "wrapped"
> > > > > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > > > > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > > > > (
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > > > > )
> > > > >
> > > > > The code is currently
> > > > >
> > > > >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> > > > >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> > > > >wrapperStyle =
> > > > >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > > > > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> > > > >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> > > > >}
> > > > >return wrapperStyle;
> > > > >}
> > > > >
> > > > > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no
> input
> > > > > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> > > > what it
> > > > > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto
> generate
> > > > WSDL
> > > > > for a method with the signature
> > > > >
> > > > > String myMethod()
> > > > >
> > > > > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> > > > >
> > > > > Simon
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> -
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no
> > > parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty
> > sequence
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
> > > looking for why this isn't the case.
> > >
> > > Thanks Raymond
> > >
> > > Simon
> > >
> > I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
> >
> > String foo()
> >
> > Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
> >
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> > attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> > elementFormDefault="qualified"
> > targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  > type="x

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> > > style.
> > > There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> operation
> > > name:
> > >
> > > input
> > > --- message
> > > --- part (only one part)
> > > --- element (the element name should be the same as
> the
> > > operation name)
> > >
> > > The element should look like this:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > >     
> > > 
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Raymond
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "tuscany-dev" 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> > > Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> > >
> > >
> > > > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > > > "wrapped"
> > > > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > > > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > > > (
> > > >
> > >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > > The code is currently
> > > >
> > > >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> > > >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> > > >wrapperStyle =
> > > >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > > > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> > > >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> > > >}
> > > >return wrapperStyle;
> > > >}
> > > >
> > > > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> > > > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> > > what it
> > > > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> > > >
> > > > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> > > WSDL
> > > > for a method with the signature
> > > >
> > > > String myMethod()
> > > >
> > > > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> > > >
> > > > Simon
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no
> > parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty
> sequence
> >
> >
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >
> > And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
> > looking for why this isn't the case.
> >
> > Thanks Raymond
> >
> > Simon
> >
> I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature
>
> String foo()
>
> Axis2 Java2WSDL generates
>
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> attributeFormDefault="qualified"
> elementFormDefault="qualified"
> targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
> 
> 
> 
>  type="xs:string" />
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> So in our code when it comes to testing for wrapped it returns false
> because
> this doesn't match the algorithm that was presented earlier in this
> thread,
> i.e. there is no part of the input message corresponding to the message
> name. So when you try this in Tuscany is throws an exception saying that
> the
> operation is not wrapped.
>
> It would be inconvenient for us to not support operations with no
> parameters. As the wsdl generation process assumes that 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[ant elder]

Axis2 has passed the jaxws tck now so either the tck doesn't check this or
we're using java2wsdl incorrectly. If it is a bug how about tolerating this
in our code for now till Axis2 gets fixed?  I.e the apply the changes
suggested below. This seems better to me that having yet another patch to
java2wsdl in Tuscany as its becoming a maintenance nightmare with these
local changes we have making it really difficult to change Axis2 releases.

   ...ant

On 9/2/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 9/2/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think the Axis2 generates a valid wrapper-style WSDL in this
> case
> > (even though the WSDL itself is legal). It violates rule i & ii as it
> has
> > the input message fooMessage doesn't have any part.
> >
> > The following is quoted from the JAX-WS 2.0 spec:
> >
> > 2.3.1.2 Wrapper Style
> > A WSDL operation qualifies for wrapper style mapping only if the
> following
> > criteria are met:
> > (i) The operation's input and output messages (if present) each contain
> > only
> > a single part
> > (ii) The input message part refers to a global element declaration whose
> > localname is equal to the operation
> > name
> > (iii) The output message part refers to a global element declaration
> > (iv) The elements referred to by the input and output message parts
> > (henceforth referred to as wrapper
> > elements) are both complex types defined using the xsd:sequence
> compositor
> > (v) The wrapper elements only contain child elements, they must not
> > contain
> > other structures such as
> > wildcards (element or attribute), xsd:choice, substitution groups
> (element
> > references are not permitted)
> > or attributes; furthermore, they must not be nillable.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Raymond
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:41 AM
> > Subject: Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >
> >
> > > On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> > >> > style.
> > >> > There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> > >> > operation
> > >> > name:
> > >> >
> > >> > input
> > >> >     --- message
> > >> > --- part (only one part)
> > >> > --- element (the element name should be the same as
> > the
> > >> > operation name)
> > >> >
> > >> > The element should look like this:
> > >> >
> > >> > 
> > >> > 
> > >> >  
> > >> > 
> > >> > 
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > Raymond
> > >> >
> > >> > - Original Message -
> > >> > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> > To: "tuscany-dev" 
> > >> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> > >> > Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > >> > > "wrapped"
> > >> > > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > >> > > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > >> > > (
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > >> > > )
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The code is currently
> > >> > >
> > >> > >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> > >> > >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> > >> > >wrapperStyle =
> > >> > >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > >> > > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> > >> > >.getOutputChild

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 9/2/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think the Axis2 generates a valid wrapper-style WSDL in this case
> (even though the WSDL itself is legal). It violates rule i & ii as it has
> the input message fooMessage doesn't have any part.
>
> The following is quoted from the JAX-WS 2.0 spec:
>
> 2.3.1.2 Wrapper Style
> A WSDL operation qualifies for wrapper style mapping only if the following
> criteria are met:
> (i) The operation's input and output messages (if present) each contain
> only
> a single part
> (ii) The input message part refers to a global element declaration whose
> localname is equal to the operation
> name
> (iii) The output message part refers to a global element declaration
> (iv) The elements referred to by the input and output message parts
> (henceforth referred to as wrapper
> elements) are both complex types defined using the xsd:sequence compositor
> (v) The wrapper elements only contain child elements, they must not
> contain
> other structures such as
> wildcards (element or attribute), xsd:choice, substitution groups (element
> references are not permitted)
> or attributes; furthermore, they must not be nillable.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
>
>
> > On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> >> > style.
> >> > There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the
> >> > operation
> >> > name:
> >> >
> >> > input
> >> > --- message
> >> > --- part (only one part)
> >> > --- element (the element name should be the same as
> the
> >> > operation name)
> >> >
> >> > The element should look like this:
> >> >
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> >  
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Raymond
> >> >
> >> > - Original Message -
> >> > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > To: "tuscany-dev" 
> >> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> >> > Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> >> > > "wrapped"
> >> > > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> >> > > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> >> > > (
> >> > >
> >> >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> >> > > )
> >> > >
> >> > > The code is currently
> >> > >
> >> > >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >> > >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >> > >wrapperStyle =
> >> > >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> >> > > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >> > >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >> > >}
> >> > >return wrapperStyle;
> >> > >}
> >> > >
> >> > > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no
> input
> >> > > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> >> > what it
> >> > > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto
> generate
> >> > WSDL
> >> > > for a method with the signature
> >> > >
> >> > > String myMethod()
> >> > >
> >> > > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> >> > >
> >> > > Simon
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Raymond Feng]

I don't think the Axis2 generates a valid wrapper-style WSDL in this case 
(even though the WSDL itself is legal). It violates rule i & ii as it has 
the input message fooMessage doesn't have any part.


The following is quoted from the JAX-WS 2.0 spec:

2.3.1.2 Wrapper Style
A WSDL operation qualifies for wrapper style mapping only if the following 
criteria are met:
(i) The operation's input and output messages (if present) each contain only 
a single part
(ii) The input message part refers to a global element declaration whose 
localname is equal to the operation

name
(iii) The output message part refers to a global element declaration
(iv) The elements referred to by the input and output message parts 
(henceforth referred to as wrapper

elements) are both complex types defined using the xsd:sequence compositor
(v) The wrapper elements only contain child elements, they must not contain 
other structures such as
wildcards (element or attribute), xsd:choice, substitution groups (element 
references are not permitted)

or attributes; furthermore, they must not be nillable.

Thanks,
Raymond

- Original Message - 
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?



On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> style.
> There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the 
> operation

> name:
>
> input
> --- message
> --- part (only one part)
> --- element (the element name should be the same as the
> operation name)
>
> The element should look like this:
>
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "tuscany-dev" 
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
>
>
> > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > "wrapped"
> > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > (
> >
> 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > )
> >
> > The code is currently
> >
> >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >wrapperStyle =
> >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >}
> >return wrapperStyle;
> >}
> >
> > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> what it
> > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> >
> > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> WSDL
> > for a method with the signature
> >
> > String myMethod()
> >
> > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> >
> > Simon
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no
parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty 
sequence





 



And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
looking for why this isn't the case.

Thanks Raymond

Simon


I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates

   
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
   attributeFormDefault="qualified" elementFormDefault="qualified"
   targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

So in our code when it comes to testing for wrapped it returns false 
because
this doesn't match the algorithm that was presented earlier in this 
thread,

i.e. there is no part of the input message corresponding to the message
name. So when you try this in Tuscany is throws an exception saying that 
the

operation is not wrapped.

It would be inconvenient for us to not support operations with no

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 8/31/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper
> > style.
> > There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the operation
> > name:
> >
> > input
> > --- message
> > --- part (only one part)
> > --- element (the element name should be the same as the
> > operation name)
> >
> > The element should look like this:
> >
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Raymond
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "tuscany-dev" 
> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> > Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
> >
> >
> > > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > > "wrapped"
> > > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > > (
> > >
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > > )
> > >
> > > The code is currently
> > >
> > >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> > >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> > >wrapperStyle =
> > >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> > >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> > >}
> > >return wrapperStyle;
> > >}
> > >
> > > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> > > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out
> > what it
> > > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> > >
> > > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> > WSDL
> > > for a method with the signature
> > >
> > > String myMethod()
> > >
> > > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> > >
> > > Simon
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no
> parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty sequence
>
>
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>
> And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now
> looking for why this isn't the case.
>
> Thanks Raymond
>
> Simon
>
I've done a bit more investigation now. For the signature

String foo()

Axis2 Java2WSDL generates


http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
attributeFormDefault="qualified" elementFormDefault="qualified"
targetNamespace="http://test/xsd";>














So in our code when it comes to testing for wrapped it returns false because
this doesn't match the algorithm that was presented earlier in this thread,
i.e. there is no part of the input message corresponding to the message
name. So when you try this in Tuscany is throws an exception saying that the
operation is not wrapped.

It would be inconvenient for us to not support operations with no
parameters. As the wsdl generation process assumes that the target
operations will be generated as wrapped operations here's what I did..

1/ Changed the isWrapperStyle  test (in WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl) to
read.

public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
if (wrapperStyle == null) {
wrapperStyle =
(operation.getInput().getMessage().getParts().values().size()
== 0 ||wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null) &&
(operation.getOutput() == null ||
wrapper.getOutputChildElements() != null);
}
return wrapperStyle;
}

I.e. I'm letting it pass if there are no input parts at all which I believe
is valid according the the JAX-WS 2.0 spec

2/ Fixed the getWrapperInfo method to take account of the case where there
are no input params

 

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

On 8/31/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper style.
> There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the operation
> name:
>
> input
> --- message
> --- part (only one part)
> --- element (the element name should be the same as the
> operation name)
>
> The element should look like this:
>
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "tuscany-dev" 
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
> Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?
>
>
> > There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the
> > "wrapped"
> > style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See
> > WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
> > (
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
> > )
> >
> > The code is currently
> >
> >public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
> >if (wrapperStyle == null) {
> >wrapperStyle =
> >wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
> > operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
> >.getOutputChildElements() != null);
> >}
> >return wrapperStyle;
> >}
> >
> > Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
> > parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out what
> it
> > means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.
> >
> > Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate
> WSDL
> > for a method with the signature
> >
> > String myMethod()
> >
> > And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.
> >
> > Simon
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What you are saying sounds right to me, I.e. you can validly have no
parameters in your method but in this case it should build an empty sequence




 



And have this as the single input type. I'm deeper into the code now looking
for why this isn't the case.

Thanks Raymond

Simon

Re: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Raymond Feng]

Hi,

The operation.getInput() cannot be null to qualify for the wrapper style. 
There must be a part in the input message corresponding to the operation 
name:


input
   --- message
   --- part (only one part)
   --- element (the element name should be the same as the 
operation name)


The element should look like this:


   

   


Thanks,
Raymond

- Original Message - 
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "tuscany-dev" 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?


There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the 
"wrapped"
style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See 
WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl

(
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
)

The code is currently

   public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
   if (wrapperStyle == null) {
   wrapperStyle =
   wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
   .getOutputChildElements() != null);
   }
   return wrapperStyle;
   }

Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out what it
means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.

Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate WSDL
for a method with the signature

String myMethod()

And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.

Simon




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Wrapper style test in WSDL processing?

[Simon Laws]

There is a test to determine whether a WSDL operation follows the "wrapped"
style in accordance with JAX-WS 2.0 spec.  See WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl
(
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/interface-wsdl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/interfacedef/wsdl/impl/WSDLOperationIntrospectorImpl.java
)

The code is currently

public boolean isWrapperStyle() throws InvalidWSDLException {
if (wrapperStyle == null) {
wrapperStyle =
wrapper.getInputChildElements() != null && (
operation.getOutput() == null || wrapper
.getOutputChildElements() != null);
}
return wrapperStyle;
}

Which doesn't seem to cater for the case where there may be no input
parameters. I'm diving into this code now to see if I can work out what it
means but if anyone has any insight I would appreciate it.

Needless to say I have a scenario where I am trying to auto generate WSDL
for a method with the signature

String myMethod()

And it's complaining that it's not wrapped.

Simon