February 2007 - jbossws-dev - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Text nodes in SOAP messages

by alex.guizar＠jboss.com

In the TCK, the test case saaj/api/javax_xml_soap/SOAPElement contains two tests about adding text nodes to different SOAPElement subtypes, namely SOAPBody and SOAPHeader. Neither the specification nor the API documents are clear on which SOAPElement subtypes accept Text nodes. The TCK requires that SOAPBodies always accept Text nodes, whereas SOAPHeaders must accept them only if the protocol is SOAP 1.1. Apart from that, I saw our SOAPEnvelopeImpl class overrides addTextNode() to signal it is not legal to attach Text nodes to it. However, one can still add a Text node by invoking the DOM method appendChild(). How should we treat Text nodes? AFAICS there are three approaches in increasing order of effort: 1) Accept them in general, unless the TCK requires otherwise 2) Behave as the RI does 3) Scan the SOAP specifications and XML Schemas, as well as the Basic Profiles for explicit requirements or implicit clues View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011613#4011613 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011613

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by dwin

I would like this to be included in 1.2, you guys would get feedback from the community before the big JBoss 5.0 release. I agree with Jason, I think keeping it as wsimport and wsgen adds portability to any JAXWS runtime. Just on a side note, if I was googling...I would use the search "JBoss wsimport" or "JBoss wsgen" View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011376#4011376 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011376

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

Further, since we do not agree on this, and since the actual team priority is TCK, I suggest that this not be included in 1.2, and in april, after I am gone, you can redo everything yourself. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011367#4011367 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011367

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

"thomas.diesler(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Also, imagine 1.2.0 is out and somebody googles for wsimport, they surely do not get information on our toolset. | This, quite frankly, is the worst reason I have heard to date. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011364#4011364 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011364

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

I completely disagree. We are talking about commodity tools. Besides, who cares if they some other toolset. The whole point of JAX-WS is that generated output of tooling is portable. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011359#4011359 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011359

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

PutObjectStoreDirHere

by Thomas Diesler

FYI http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3944620 The recovery manager will look for the object store in wherever you've set it in your jbossjts-properties.xml (which is searched for in the cwd and your classpath). If you don't change the default setting in there (or the system can't find the property file), then it'll default to cwd and be called PutObjectStoreDirHere. Can you confirm that this is the case? -- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thomas Diesler Web Service Lead JBoss, a division of Red Hat xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Re: TCK Ecludes for known issues

by Thomas Diesler

Ok, in that case we move the exclude list to jbossws/trunk and use it for our CTS work only without disturbing others. The approach with tracking regression through defined excludes has worked well and gives us an undistorted view of what is left do be done. cheers -thoams Jason T. Greene wrote: > The TCK team has asked that we stop using the exclude list to track > regression. So, I am going to remove all but challenges from the list. > If you have any objections please talk to them about it. > > -- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thomas Diesler Web Service Lead JBoss, a division of Red Hat xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by thomas.diesler＠jboss.com

I still believe that the jbossws tools should be named differently than the RI tools. Otherwise, there will be a lot of confusion in the forums and *a lot* more typing because it needs to be clarified every time what tools do you actually mean. Also, imagine 1.2.0 is out and somebody googles for wsimport, they surely do not get information on our toolset. My favorite is still wstools (with additional arguments) . Lets discuss the tools integration in 1.2.0 on Thu at the conf call. cheers View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4011243#4011243 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4011243

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by weston.price＠jboss.com

I'm getting a stack trace in JBoss 3.2.3. Is this the right forum? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4010210#4010210 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4010210

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: wsimport API, SPI, command line tool, and ant task

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

"thomas.diesler(a)jboss.com" wrote : Hey, Jason this is excellent work - well done. | Thanks! anonymous wrote : | Please have a look at javax.xml.soap.FactoryLoader | This is the lookup we use throughout the jaxws impl. | This shouldn't be used like this for several reasons 1. We are not allowed to alter javax.* beyond the specification, so we can't make FactoryLoader public. 2. This loader is SAAJ specific and refers to "jaxm.properties", therefore having APIs outside of SAAJ use it will make them non comformant. (e.g javax.xml.ws.spi.Provider) 3. It introduces a dependency on our implementation of the API, which is wrong. Our code has to work with any compliant API jar. 4. In the case of javax.xml.ws.spi.Provider, it introduces a dependency between differing API jars. So jboss-jaxws.jar can only be used with jboss-saaj.jar. Regardless, in order to allow for the tools API to be standalone (easy for integrators), it needs it's own discovery mechanism. The reason I didn't implement the same number of options is because this API is not a Java spec, so I don't expect that many people will actually want to provide an alternative implementation. anonymous wrote : | Now that we have wsgen + wsimport functionality I believe we should make it available in jbossws-1.2.0. This would give us the much needed community QA before 2.0.0 | | Could you please merge your work to jbossws-1.2.0 | Sure. anonymous wrote : | For sake of clarity I suggest we do not refer to wsgen + wsimport when we talk about our tool set. How about: wswsdl, wsjava? | Personally I think that generate and import are more intuitive names, and they also reflect the API and ant task. Also unlike JAX-RPC tools, wsgen is not the direct opposite of wsimport. It's primary purpose is to generate wrapper classes, so wsdl generation is off by default. So I don't think this particular tool will get a lot of usage on our stack since we generate this dynamically anyway. The other reason I stuck with the common names is to make it easier for someone to move from say the implementation in JDK6 (which uses wsgen and wsimport). Although, the command line arguments are slightly different, which I was hesitant on. The main reason is that I wanted to use gnu getop which simplifies command line argument parsing, follows unix conventions, and is used in other jboss tools. This could be easily changed to directly mirror the arguments in the RI, if you guys think we should. We could also make them jboss-wsgen.sh and jboss-wsimport.sh but that would be extra typing. -Jason View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4010207#4010207 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4010207

17 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jbossws-dev February 2007