OK, so here's the scenario:
1) In wsdl we define a binding to use literal encoding and rpc for an
operation foo.
2) The foo operation has defined an input parameter called inParam of type
xsd:anyType
3) Now we define an arbitrary type in XMLSchema called Bar, and generate a
Bean for this type
Hi Thomas:
> In our case the ideal solution would be to use literal
> encoding, and send
> the parameters with their tags qualified by their namespaces.
> Then on the
> server side you have access to the QName of the parameter
> type and can
> easily use the standard Axis typemapping to ma
Message-
> From: Thomas Börkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Proposed change for RPCProvider.java for Beta 1
>
>
> HI!
>
> 1) We extend RPCProvider and override some methods of it. I
>
ED]]
> Sent: Montag, 25. März 2002 17:31
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Proposed change for RPCProvider.java for Beta 1
>
>
>
> Hi Thomas:
>
> I have a couple of questions relating to the dynamic stuff
> you're doing with Axis.
>
&g
Hi Glen, Thomas
a comment on your first question, since it seems to be very closely related
to what we are trying to do as well.
At 11:31 AM 3/25/2002 -0500, Glen Daniels wrote:
>Hi Thomas:
>
>I have a couple of questions relating to the dynamic stuff you're doing
>with Axis.
>
>1) For Axis t
t sometime today?
Thanks,
--Glen
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Börkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:01 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Proposed change for RPCProvider.java for Beta 1
>
>
> HI!
>
> I can descr
HI!
Thanks for committing my change.
There is one problem though: We need the "throws Exception" in the signature of the
getMethod() method, as it was in my proposal.
Could you change that?
Thanks!
Regards,
Thomas
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Börkel
> Sent: Freitag, 8. Mä
+1 Sounds more flexible.
Han Ming
On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 02:26 , Thomas Börkel wrote:
> HI!
>
> I have made a few minor changes (only extract code from
> processMessage() to seperate methods) in RPCProvider.java (please find
> attached) that allow us much more easily to do our own invoc
+1 (oh boy, do we want this).
+Melissa
On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 02:26 , Thomas Börkel wrote:
> HI!
>
> I have made a few minor changes (only extract code from
> processMessage() to seperate methods) in RPCProvider.java (please find
> attached) that allow us much more easily to do our own
>
> Requests for WSDL are satisfied on the fly.
>
> If you need further information, feel free to ask.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
>
>>-Original Message-----
>>From: William Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: Freitag, 8. März 2002 12:30
>>T
free to ask.
Regards,
Thomas
> -Original Message-
> From: William Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Freitag, 8. März 2002 12:30
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Proposed change for RPCProvider.java for Beta 1
>
>
> Changes posted by Thomas Börkel s
Changes posted by Thomas Börkel seems to be related to my proposal on
implementing the dynamic RPCProvider, is there any more information on
how to perform your "invocation without deployment" in the Axis framework?
William Lee
Thomas Börkel wrote:
> HI!
>
> I have made a few minor changes (
The proposed change looks ok to me. I just wonder if any of the helper
methods, e.g. getMethod, should really belong to JavaProvider so that they
could be shared by RPCProvider and MsgProvider. What do others think?
Glyn
13 matches
Mail list logo
