You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@axis.apache.org by Ju...@mro.com on 2004/06/17 18:07:00 UTC
WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
This is not a question on Axis, but rather a problem that I'm facing while
running the WS-I test tool on my doc/literal Web Services. I have
doc/literal Web Services with some operations whose return type is void.
The WSDL looks like:
<message name="Request">
<part name="input" element="......"/>
</message>
<message name="Response"/>
<portType name="....">
<operation name=".....">
<input message="mxws:Request"/>
<output message="mxws:Response"/>
</operation>
</portType>
The output message in the WSDL has no parts. I believe this is the correct
way (as per WS-I) of defining operations whose input and/or output is void.
The SOAP response on the wire has an empty SOAP body, which also seems
correct:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<soapenv:Envelope
xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<soapenv:Body/>
</soapenv:Envelope>
The WS-I Analyzer however reports the following error:
Assertion: WSI1013
Result: Failed
Failue Message: The content of the response message did not match the
wsdl:message definition. The order of parts in soap:body does not match
the order of wsdl:partS in wsdl:message, or it has a doc-lit binding but
the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part, or it has an
rpc-lit binding but no wrapper element.
Is this a valid error or a bug in the WS-I testing tool that needs to be
reported? Has anyone seen this before?
Thanks,
Junaid
RE: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
Posted by Ju...@mro.com.
Yes that's what I thought too. I will report this as a bug.
Thanks,
Junaid
"Anne Thomas
Manes"
<an...@manes.net> To
<ax...@ws.apache.org>
06/17/2004 08:52 cc
PM
Subject
RE: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web
Please respond to Service
axis-user@ws.apac
he.org
Your WSDL looks correct.
Mind you, the error message makes sense. You do have a doc-lit binding, but
"the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part"
But I suspect that the analyzer tool is not properly recognizing that you
have no parts.
I suggest you report this as a bug.
Anne
-----Original Message-----
From: Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com [mailto:Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 1:51 PM
To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
<binding name="....." type="mxws:PortType">
<soap:binding style="document"
transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
<operation name="....">
<soap:operation style="document"/>
<input>
<soap:body use="literal"/>
</input>
<output>
<soap:body use="literal" />
</output>
</operation>
</binding>
<service name=".....">
<port name="......" binding="mxws:Binding">
<soap:address location="........"/>
</port>
</service>
- Junaid
Jim Murphy
<jmurphy@mindreef
.com> To
axis-user@ws.apache.org
06/17/2004 01:34 cc
PM
Subject
Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web
Please respond to Service
axis-user@ws.apac
he.org
What does your Binding look like?
Jim
Mindreef, Inc.
Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com wrote:
>
>
>
> This is not a question on Axis, but rather a problem that I'm facing
while
> running the WS-I test tool on my doc/literal Web Services. I have
> doc/literal Web Services with some operations whose return type is void.
> The WSDL looks like:
>
> <message name="Request">
> <part name="input" element="......"/>
> </message>
> <message name="Response"/>
>
> <portType name="....">
> <operation name=".....">
> <input message="mxws:Request"/>
> <output message="mxws:Response"/>
> </operation>
> </portType>
>
>
> The output message in the WSDL has no parts. I believe this is the
correct
> way (as per WS-I) of defining operations whose input and/or output is
void.
> The SOAP response on the wire has an empty SOAP body, which also seems
> correct:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body/>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
>
>
>
>
> The WS-I Analyzer however reports the following error:
>
> Assertion: WSI1013
> Result: Failed
>
> Failue Message: The content of the response message did not match the
> wsdl:message definition. The order of parts in soap:body does not match
> the order of wsdl:partS in wsdl:message, or it has a doc-lit binding but
> the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
> declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part, or it has an
> rpc-lit binding but no wrapper element.
>
>
>
> Is this a valid error or a bug in the WS-I testing tool that needs to be
> reported? Has anyone seen this before?
>
> Thanks,
> Junaid
>
>
RE: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
Posted by Anne Thomas Manes <an...@manes.net>.
Your WSDL looks correct.
Mind you, the error message makes sense. You do have a doc-lit binding, but
"the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part"
But I suspect that the analyzer tool is not properly recognizing that you
have no parts.
I suggest you report this as a bug.
Anne
-----Original Message-----
From: Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com [mailto:Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 1:51 PM
To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
<binding name="....." type="mxws:PortType">
<soap:binding style="document"
transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
<operation name="....">
<soap:operation style="document"/>
<input>
<soap:body use="literal"/>
</input>
<output>
<soap:body use="literal" />
</output>
</operation>
</binding>
<service name=".....">
<port name="......" binding="mxws:Binding">
<soap:address location="........"/>
</port>
</service>
- Junaid
Jim Murphy
<jmurphy@mindreef
.com> To
axis-user@ws.apache.org
06/17/2004 01:34 cc
PM
Subject
Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web
Please respond to Service
axis-user@ws.apac
he.org
What does your Binding look like?
Jim
Mindreef, Inc.
Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com wrote:
>
>
>
> This is not a question on Axis, but rather a problem that I'm facing
while
> running the WS-I test tool on my doc/literal Web Services. I have
> doc/literal Web Services with some operations whose return type is void.
> The WSDL looks like:
>
> <message name="Request">
> <part name="input" element="......"/>
> </message>
> <message name="Response"/>
>
> <portType name="....">
> <operation name=".....">
> <input message="mxws:Request"/>
> <output message="mxws:Response"/>
> </operation>
> </portType>
>
>
> The output message in the WSDL has no parts. I believe this is the
correct
> way (as per WS-I) of defining operations whose input and/or output is
void.
> The SOAP response on the wire has an empty SOAP body, which also seems
> correct:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body/>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
>
>
>
>
> The WS-I Analyzer however reports the following error:
>
> Assertion: WSI1013
> Result: Failed
>
> Failue Message: The content of the response message did not match the
> wsdl:message definition. The order of parts in soap:body does not match
> the order of wsdl:partS in wsdl:message, or it has a doc-lit binding but
> the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
> declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part, or it has an
> rpc-lit binding but no wrapper element.
>
>
>
> Is this a valid error or a bug in the WS-I testing tool that needs to be
> reported? Has anyone seen this before?
>
> Thanks,
> Junaid
>
>
Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
Posted by Ju...@mro.com.
<binding name="....." type="mxws:PortType">
<soap:binding style="document"
transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
<operation name="....">
<soap:operation style="document"/>
<input>
<soap:body use="literal"/>
</input>
<output>
<soap:body use="literal" />
</output>
</operation>
</binding>
<service name=".....">
<port name="......" binding="mxws:Binding">
<soap:address location="........"/>
</port>
</service>
- Junaid
Jim Murphy
<jmurphy@mindreef
.com> To
axis-user@ws.apache.org
06/17/2004 01:34 cc
PM
Subject
Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web
Please respond to Service
axis-user@ws.apac
he.org
What does your Binding look like?
Jim
Mindreef, Inc.
Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com wrote:
>
>
>
> This is not a question on Axis, but rather a problem that I'm facing
while
> running the WS-I test tool on my doc/literal Web Services. I have
> doc/literal Web Services with some operations whose return type is void.
> The WSDL looks like:
>
> <message name="Request">
> <part name="input" element="......"/>
> </message>
> <message name="Response"/>
>
> <portType name="....">
> <operation name=".....">
> <input message="mxws:Request"/>
> <output message="mxws:Response"/>
> </operation>
> </portType>
>
>
> The output message in the WSDL has no parts. I believe this is the
correct
> way (as per WS-I) of defining operations whose input and/or output is
void.
> The SOAP response on the wire has an empty SOAP body, which also seems
> correct:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body/>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
>
>
>
>
> The WS-I Analyzer however reports the following error:
>
> Assertion: WSI1013
> Result: Failed
>
> Failue Message: The content of the response message did not match the
> wsdl:message definition. The order of parts in soap:body does not match
> the order of wsdl:partS in wsdl:message, or it has a doc-lit binding but
> the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
> declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part, or it has an
> rpc-lit binding but no wrapper element.
>
>
>
> Is this a valid error or a bug in the WS-I testing tool that needs to be
> reported? Has anyone seen this before?
>
> Thanks,
> Junaid
>
>
Re: WS-I Test on doc/literal Web Service
Posted by Jim Murphy <jm...@mindreef.com>.
What does your Binding look like?
Jim
Mindreef, Inc.
Junaid.Bhatra@mro.com wrote:
>
>
>
> This is not a question on Axis, but rather a problem that I'm facing while
> running the WS-I test tool on my doc/literal Web Services. I have
> doc/literal Web Services with some operations whose return type is void.
> The WSDL looks like:
>
> <message name="Request">
> <part name="input" element="......"/>
> </message>
> <message name="Response"/>
>
> <portType name="....">
> <operation name=".....">
> <input message="mxws:Request"/>
> <output message="mxws:Response"/>
> </operation>
> </portType>
>
>
> The output message in the WSDL has no parts. I believe this is the correct
> way (as per WS-I) of defining operations whose input and/or output is void.
> The SOAP response on the wire has an empty SOAP body, which also seems
> correct:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body/>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
>
>
>
>
> The WS-I Analyzer however reports the following error:
>
> Assertion: WSI1013
> Result: Failed
>
> Failue Message: The content of the response message did not match the
> wsdl:message definition. The order of parts in soap:body does not match
> the order of wsdl:partS in wsdl:message, or it has a doc-lit binding but
> the child element of soap:body is not an instance of the global element
> declaration referenced by the corresponding wsdl:part, or it has an
> rpc-lit binding but no wrapper element.
>
>
>
> Is this a valid error or a bug in the WS-I testing tool that needs to be
> reported? Has anyone seen this before?
>
> Thanks,
> Junaid
>
>