Thanks, Dhiru - one more question ...
> What is described is for the case when only the @WebServiceProvider
annotation is used without a webservices.xml file.
So, is this really meant to be guidance to implementors with containers
that are generating the webservices.xml? In that case, why should the
spec require this? And even if it does require a constraint on
<servlet-link>, should this be described in Section 5 which is
addressing the server programming model and not JSR-109 implementation
issues?
-- Mark
Dhiru Pandey wrote:
> Hello Mark,
>
> What is described is for the case when only the @WebServiceProvider
> annotation is used without a webservices.xml file.
> One could certainly provide this file along with the annotation and
> then <servlet-link> could be specified to be whatever the developer
> wants.
>
> I think the language in the spec. is confusing and should be fixed to
> clear this up.
>
> Thanks,
> -Dhiru
>
>
> Mark Hansen wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dhiru (and also Vijay) for pointing out the JSR-109
>> requirement. I don't know how I missed that!
>>
>> > You should be able to override this if the webservices.xml file is
>> used
>>
>> But, Dhiru, how can I override if JSR-109 *requires* <servlet-link>
>> in the webservices.xml to be the fully qualified name of the SIB?
>>
>> -- Mark
>>
>> Dhiru Pandey wrote:
>>
>>> If you are not using a deployment descriptor (webservices.xml) file
>>> then this is true.
>>>
>>> Please see section 5.3.2.2 on WebServiceProvider annotation (JSR-109):
>>>
>>> "For Servlet based endpoints using this annotation, fully qualified
>>> name of the Service Implementation Bean class
>>> must be used as the <servlet-link> element in the deployment
>>> descriptor to map the Port component to the actual
>>> Servlet."
>>>
>>> This implies that the servlet name (which is the same as the
>>> <servlet-link>) should be fully qualified name of the Service
>>> Implementation Bean class
>>>
>>> You should be able to override this if the webservices.xml file is used
>>>
>>> -Dhiru
>>>
>>> Mark Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>>> It seems to be a requirement in GlassFish that when deploying an
>>>> @WebServiceProvider along with an web.xml, that the <servlet-name>
>>>> must be equal to the fully qualified name of the provider class
>>>> (i.e., the class with the @WebServiceProvider annotation). Is that
>>>> correct? Is this a requirement specified anywhere in JSR-109 or
>>>> JSR-181, because if it is, I cannot find such a requirement.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for any insight on this.
>>>>
>>>> -- Mark
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>