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 Rodrigo Ruiz <rr...@gridsystems.com> on 2006/05/19 15:15:46 UTC
Is defining a common type for "void" messages" allowed in document/literal?
Hi all,
I am wondering if it is valid to define a common VoidType as:
<xsd:complexType name="VoidType">
<xsd:sequence/>
</xsd:complexType>
and use it for all the elements that are empty. That is, for an
interface like:
public interface MyProfile extends Remote {
String getMyName();
void setMyName(String name);
}
Instead of:
MyProfilePortType
getMyName
Input : GetMyNameRequest --> GetMyNameRequestType
Output : GetMyNameResponse --> GetMyNameResponseType
setMyName
Input : SetMyNameRequest --> SetMyNameRequestType
Output : SetMyNameResponse --> SetMyNameResponseType
where GetMyNameRequestType and SetMyNameResponseType are equivalent,
have this WSDL definitions:
MyProfilePortType
getMyName
Input : GetMyNameRequest --> VoidType
Output : GetMyNameResponse --> GetMyNameResponseType
setMyName
Input : SetMyNameRequest --> SetMyNameRequestType
Output : SetMyNameResponse --> VoidType
Will Axis correctly understand such a WSDL when generating code?
Thanks
Rodrigo
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GRIDSYSTEMS Rodrigo Ruiz Aguayo
Parc Bit - Son Espanyol
07120 Palma de Mallorca mailto:rruiz@gridsystems.com
Baleares - España Tel:+34-971435085 Fax:+34-971435082
http://www.gridsystems.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.6.1/343 - Release Date: 18/05/2006
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-user-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-user-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Is defining a common type for "void" messages" allowed in document/literal?
Posted by Anne Thomas Manes <at...@gmail.com>.
Yes. It's a good practice.
Anne
On 5/19/06, Rodrigo Ruiz <rr...@gridsystems.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am wondering if it is valid to define a common VoidType as:
>
> <xsd:complexType name="VoidType">
> <xsd:sequence/>
> </xsd:complexType>
>
> and use it for all the elements that are empty. That is, for an
> interface like:
>
> public interface MyProfile extends Remote {
> String getMyName();
> void setMyName(String name);
> }
>
> Instead of:
>
> MyProfilePortType
> getMyName
> Input : GetMyNameRequest --> GetMyNameRequestType
> Output : GetMyNameResponse --> GetMyNameResponseType
> setMyName
> Input : SetMyNameRequest --> SetMyNameRequestType
> Output : SetMyNameResponse --> SetMyNameResponseType
>
> where GetMyNameRequestType and SetMyNameResponseType are equivalent,
> have this WSDL definitions:
>
> MyProfilePortType
> getMyName
> Input : GetMyNameRequest --> VoidType
> Output : GetMyNameResponse --> GetMyNameResponseType
> setMyName
> Input : SetMyNameRequest --> SetMyNameRequestType
> Output : SetMyNameResponse --> VoidType
>
>
> Will Axis correctly understand such a WSDL when generating code?
>
> Thanks
> Rodrigo
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> GRIDSYSTEMS Rodrigo Ruiz Aguayo
> Parc Bit - Son Espanyol
> 07120 Palma de Mallorca mailto:rruiz@gridsystems.com
> Baleares - España Tel:+34-971435085 Fax:+34-971435082
> http://www.gridsystems.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.6.1/343 - Release Date: 18/05/2006
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-user-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-user-help@ws.apache.org
>
>