On Thu May 14 2009 2:07:12 pm David Robertson wrote:
> Daniel Kulp wrote:
> > On Mon May 11 2009 5:19:06 pm David Robertson wrote:
> >> I'm having a problem with the attached WSDL. It is valid, but the code
> >> generated for the operation has the output elements, unwrapped, in the
> >> parameter
On Thu May 14 2009 2:07:12 pm David Robertson wrote:
> Daniel Kulp wrote:
> > On Mon May 11 2009 5:19:06 pm David Robertson wrote:
> >> I'm having a problem with the attached WSDL. It is valid, but the code
> >> generated for the operation has the output elements, unwrapped, in the
> >> parameter
Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Mon May 11 2009 5:19:06 pm David Robertson wrote:
I'm having a problem with the attached WSDL. It is valid, but the code
generated for the operation has the output elements, unwrapped, in the
parameter list and a void return type. I don't have the option of
changing th
On Mon May 11 2009 5:19:06 pm David Robertson wrote:
> I'm having a problem with the attached WSDL. It is valid, but the code
> generated for the operation has the output elements, unwrapped, in the
> parameter list and a void return type. I don't have the option of
> changing the WSDL. Is this
I'm having a problem with the attached WSDL. It is valid, but the code
generated for the operation has the output elements, unwrapped, in the
parameter list and a void return type. I don't have the option of
changing the WSDL. Is this something that can be fixed with enough
binding entries, or w
