Hi, simon
Axis2's JAVA2WSDL can handle the JAX-WS annnotations by default.
Since it's org.apache.axis2.description.java2wsdl.DefaultSchemaGeneratorcontains
following lines:
JAnnotation annotation = jclass.getAnnotation(
AnnotationConstants.WEB_SERVICE);
if (annotation != null) {
String tns =
annotation.getValue(
AnnotationConstants.TARGETNAMESPACE).asString();
if (tns != null && !"".equals(tns)) {
targetNamespace = tns;
schemaTargetNameSpace = tns;
}
}
....
JAnnotation methodAnnon = jMethod.getAnnotation(
AnnotationConstants.WEB_METHOD);
if (methodAnnon != null) {
if
(methodAnnon.getValue(AnnotationConstants.EXCLUDE).asBoolean())
{
continue;
}
}
if use the "-sg" optional to replace the DefaultSchemaGenerator with
org.apache.axis2.jaxbri.JaxbSchemaGenerator
then it can handle the JAXB annotations.(actually it can handle JAX-WS and
JAXB both, since JaxbSchemaGenerator extends DefaultSchemaGenerator )
I will look into CXF in the furture, and find out what's differrent between
them, if you alreadly know it, i would like to hear your comments.
Best Regards
- Alex
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See inline.
>
> Simon
>
> Scott Kurz wrote:
> > One important difference if I understand correctly is the tool handles
> SDOs
> > whereas the runtime
> > interface-wsdl-java2wsdl module only handles POJO types.
> >
> > I think the runtime code basically relies on Axis2's Java->XSD mapping,
> > which I don't think would
> > fully honor JAXB annotations in the Java as it ideally would (though it
> > looks like we do an extra
> > step allowing us to recognize if a NS->pkg mapping other than the
> default
> > was used to gen the Java).
> >
> > (With some configuration, I believe it's possible to use Axis2's J2W
> > function in a way such that it would
> > recognize these JAXB annotations, or another alternative I believe Simon
> > Nash mentioned was to look into
> > CXF.)
> >
> Can you say more about what Axis2 configuration is needed? Does this only
> handle JAXB annotations or does it handle JAX-WS annnotations as well?
> My primary use case that led me to look at using CXF was handling JAX-WS
> annotations in service interfaces (which may also require handling JAXB
> annotations in data types passed over the interface).
>
> > I didn't follow all of the discussion about removing SDO from the
> Tuscany
> > charter... but if SDO is no
> > longer a special part of the Tuscany project then what would happen to
> the
> > W2J/J2W tools built around
> > SDO support?
> >
> If some other project were to produce suitable SDO tools, then Tuscany
> could
> delegate to those tools instead of having its own. Until this happens,
> I'd
> expect the current tools to remain in Tuscany.
>
> Simon
>
> > Scott
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>> In tuscany-sca (1.1 above) , there are two modules related with
> >> java2wsdl:
> >>> 1.) modules\interface-wsdl-java2wsdl
> >>> 2.) tools\java2wsdl
> >>> The java2wsdl interface(1) provides a runtime interface to handle java
> >>> object to wsdl object
> >>> the java2wsdl tool (2) provides a command-line tool for converting
> java
> >>> classes into wsdl files.
> >>> the (1) use JAVA2WSDLBuilder (from Axis2 1.3 code) and
> >> AxisService2WSDL11,
> >>> AxisService2WSDL20 to generate WSDL
> >>> the (2) use TuscanyJAVA2WSDLBuilder, TuscanyWSDLTypeGenerator ... to
> >>> generate WSDL
> >>> Why there are two different ways? Why not just use axis code only or
> >>> tuscany
> >>> code only for the two modules?
> >>> Or there are already a plan to merge the code? so which one will be if
> >>> there
> >>> is a choice?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> - Alex
> >>>
> >> Hi Alex
> >>
> >> I don't think there is a good reason for the two approaches to WSDL
> >> generation. It's probably just historical. I agree that it would be
> much
> >> cleaner and more maintainable to have one set of code for doing this. I
> >> saw
> >> a comment on the list the other from someone getting different results
> >> depending on which approach they used. This is obviously not a good
> thing.
> >> Are you interested in getting involved in trying to fix this?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
http://jroller.com/page/dindin
