On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Jonathan Gallimore < [email protected]> wrote:
> I remember thinking this was a pain when I hit it about a year ago - I'm > glad its not just me :) Same here! > As David says, we could probably make this work, but its against the > current > spec, so the code might not work with other containers. I'm happy to have a > go at this when I have some free time (unless someone else beats me to it) > ;-) Right. Now, it is within the specification boundaries to have a web service implementation class not reference any SEIs (i.e. you just put @WebService on the class, and that's that). Would it be legal to have such a class implement, say, a @Remote business interface only, but also be annotated--just itself, no SEI--with @WebService? It strikes me then that clients could generate their own stubs without having the hassle--is this the only place in the entire Java ecosystem where the presence of an interface is a hassle? Could be!--of dealing with the SEI. Best, Laird
