June 2008 - jbossws-dev - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: JBWS-2234 - SOAP 1.2 JAX-RPC Endpoint sends SOAP 1.1 mes

by alessio.soldano＠jboss.com

I'm thinking you might be able to get the endpoint metadata from the message context. Then you could set the env namespace in the MessageFactory depending on the bindingId in the endpoint metadata. Could this be the solution here? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4161142#4161142 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4161142

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: WS4EE and AS5

by richard.opalka＠jboss.com

We generate web.xml/jboss-web.xml for JBoss AS 5 Beta 4 and we generate JBossWebMetaData for JBoss AS 5 trunk. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160600#4160600 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160600

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: WS4EE and AS5

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

The issue in jbossas5 is that unless the descriptor is generated before the parsing deployers execute, its not going to be used, at least properly. I think we still have duplicate descriptor parsing going on from legacy tomcat behavior, but I'm not sure since the JBAS-5144 changes. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160599#4160599 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160599

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: WS4EE and AS5

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

Is that statement really true? You generate web.xml/jboss-web.xml or you generate the JBossWebMetaData directly? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160597#4160597 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160597

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: WS4EE and AS5

by richard.opalka＠jboss.com

"anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : | I see that JBossWS is trying to deploy a web application for ejb based WS. This web application would be the entry point for the WS apps. | | Do you still dynamically generate the web.xml/jboss-web.xml? Yes, we still dynamically generate web.xml/jboss-web.xml for EJB endpoints. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160596#4160596 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160596

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - JBWS-2234 - SOAP 1.2 JAX-RPC Endpoint sends SOAP 1.1 message

by darran.lofthouse＠jboss.com

I am currently working on continuing the following Jira issue and adding a full test case: - http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBWS-2234 I am now seeing that requests are correctly received as SOAP 1.2 and the response is being correctly sent back as SOAP 1.2 but for both checked and unchecked exceptions these are being sent back as SOAP 1.1. Looking at the classes CommonSOAPBinding and CommonSOAP12Binding these both create a MessageFactoryImpl with the correct envelope namespace so messages created by these are now correct. However the SOAPFaults are created by a different utility: - SOAPFaultHelperJAXRPC and SOAPFaultHelperJAXWS - both of these create a new MessageFactoryImpl with the default envelope namespace so default to SOAP 1.1. I did start to think that both of these should have the CommonSOAPBinding passed in and that the could use that to create the message so it will correctly reflect SOAP 1.2 and 1.1 as required. For the JAX-RPC implementation this would be fine but when JAX-WS is added there are further calls to cope with that make this impossible. The SOAPFaultHelperJAXWS calls the SOAPFaultHelperJAXRPC so anything required for JAX-RPC needs to be present from JAX-WS. The SOAPFaultHelperJAXWS can also be called from the following classes: - MessageBinding PayloadBinding HandlerChainExecutor These no longer extend the CommonSOAPBinding so this is not something we can pass in. A couple of ideas I have thought of. - Anything that calls either of the FaultHelper classes should pass in the correct MessageFactoryImpl - The CommonBinding interface could have a createMessage method added and then CommonBinding is passed in for the calls. Either of these might be options but things get slightly more complicated with the HandlerChainExecutor as the CommonBinding is not available there. Are there any further thoughts on the correct envelope namespace being made available for all faults created using either FaultHelper? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160301#4160301 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160301

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: @WebServiceRef default name

by alessio.soldano＠jboss.com

Fix working properly, I've tested it creating a local snapshot of the metadata prj. Waiting the metadata release to solve the issues depending on JBMETA-64. Thanks View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160200#4160200 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160200

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: @WebServiceRef default name

by alessio.soldano＠jboss.com

OK, I'll give it a try. And, yes, I think it's ok to require the name for @WebServiceRef on a type. Thank you View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160162#4160162 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160162

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: @WebServiceRef default name

by emuckenhuber

okay i changed that. Additionally it is not allowed anymore to define a @WebServiceRef on a Type without specifying the name attribute - as they say: 'For class annotations, there is no default and this must be specified.' So i think this is ok too ? :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160160#4160160 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160160

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: @WebServiceRef default name

by alessio.soldano＠jboss.com

"emuckenhuber" wrote : Hmm yes, as the serviceRefName is used for jndi binding this could lead to a conflict. | I mean i think decalaringClass / name makes more sense and would avoid this. And as you mentioned that the spec is unclear on this, we maybe should use the default naming like it was in beta4!? OK, that's fine with me (using the default name declaringClass / name). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4160117#4160117 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4160117

15 years, 10 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 June 2008