So why is the wrapper type SayHi in java_first_jaxws not needed and in wsdl_first the wrapper type GetCustomersByName is needed?
Thanks! On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Eric J. Van der Velden < [email protected]> wrote: > Thanks. But I do not understand it 100%. In the wsdl_first sample there > are generated: GetCustomersByName (and GetCustomersByNameReponse). I create > the WAR with GetCustomersByName.class in WEB-INF/classes, deploy it in > Tomcat and it works. Now I remove GetCustomersByName.class and restart > Tomcat. Now I get an error: > > </pre><p><b>Root Cause</b></p><pre>java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: > com/example/customerservice/GetCustomersByName > > So why is this wrapper type in wsdl_first not generated > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Andrei Shakirin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The SayHi and SayHiResponse are just wrappers around string >> request/response. They are necessary, because only a string cannot be sent >> as a valid XML. >> The wrapper types are generated by default on the base of method name >> (sayHi), so you don't need to define them explicitly in java code. >> You can customize the wrapper using javax.xml.ws.RequestWrapper and >> javax.xml.ws.ResponseWrapper annotations. >> Please refer JAX-WS spec for further details: >> https://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/mrel/jsr224/index3.html >> >> Regards, >> Andrei. >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Eric J. Van der Velden [mailto:[email protected]] >> > Sent: Mittwoch, 25. Oktober 2017 15:47 >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: In the java_first_jaxws sample of cxf there are no SayHi and >> > SayHiResponse types. >> > >> > In the java_first_jaxws sample of cxf there are for example no SayHi and >> > SayHiResponse types. >> > >> > Why not? Aren't they needed for (de)serialization? >> > >> > In the wsdl_first sample, types like GetCustomersByName and >> > GetCustomersByNameResponse are there, and in the debugger I saw that >> they >> > are used. >> > >> > When I use java2ws, SayHi and SayHiResponse are there. >> > >> > Thanks! >> > >
