The JAX-RPC API isn't final yet, and no one is permitted to release a final
implementation until the spec is final.
Anne
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Public discussion on JAX-RPC
> [mailto:JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM]On Behalf Of Menon Vinod
> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 1:52 PM
> To: JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
> Subject: JAXRPC-Commerical Implementation
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anybody know whether any J2EE vendors have an implementation
> of JAXRPC
> ?. As I understand the
> WSDP(RI) cannot be used for production applications.
>
> Thanks,
> -Vinod
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Vinod K. Menon/EMPL/VA/Bell-Atl on
> 05/06/2002 01:46 PM ---------------------------
>
>
> Sudhir <sudhir_at_INFOLEAD.COM>@JAVA.SUN.COM> on 05/06/2002 01:16:49 PM
>
> Please respond to Public discussion on JAX-RPC
> <JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM>
>
> Sent by: Public discussion on JAX-RPC <JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM>
>
>
> To: JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
> cc:
> Subject: Re: Parsing Complex Datatypes
>
>
> Michael,
> Thanks for the reply.
> The reason I am trying to do this is that, I dont have the WSDL file till
> the runtime. I will have to parse the file at runtime and generatet the
> client. I dont see how I can achieve this using xrpcc. I was trying to use
> DII. And as you said parsing the complex datatypes is proving to be really
> a
> tedious job. I was just wondering if there are any solutions available for
> that.
>
> Thanks
> Sudhir
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sapozhnikov Michael" <msapozhnikov_at_AXSONE.COM>
> To: <JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM>; "Sudhir Prabhu" <sudhir_at_INFOLEAD.COM>
> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 8:18 AM
> Subject: Re: Parsing Complex Datatypes
>
>
> > Sudhir,
> >
> > You don't have to do any special for parsing the complex data types in
> your WSDL. The xrpcc tool will generate for you Java code for your types,
> serializers for these new Java classes, code needed to register all that
> serializers, etc.
> >
> > But there are some concerns which I'd lake to share with, because I do
> exactly the same - trying to generate Java client code from WSDL and ran
> across some limitations, where I have to adjust WSDL in order to
> get what I
> want to.
> >
> > Some WSDL constructs are optional and no code will be generated
> for them,
> like: ref, union, choice, group, restrictions, etc. (refer to spec chapter
> 18 for details), also some XML types are not supported - just don't use
> them
> (see spec 4.2.1). Plus not everything may work as expected.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I could not find a way of determining what actually is
> wrong in my WSDL, there is no log file for it. If some construct is not
> supported - just a smaller subset of generated files is produced and
> analyzing result is the only way for me to find the problem.
> >
> > I also had to adjust generated <myService>_SerializerRegistry.java code,
> because my types were generated correctly, but registration of serialezers
> for some types in this class was missing. I had to do some other
> changes in
> generated code to make it work at runtime.
> >
> > So you have to be carefull with WSDL, it may not work for the first time
> and may need adjustment, especially if you WSDL was not generated by tool.
> >
> > I hope this will help you.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 3 May 2002 16:19:18 -0700, Sudhir <sudhir_at_INFOLEAD.COM> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi,
> > > I am trying to parse a given WSDL and generate the clients on the fly.
> I
> am
> > >able to do that for WSDL's with simple data types. I want to
> know how do
> I
> > >go about parsing the complex data types. Any help/suggestions/existing
> code
> > >samples would be very helpful to me.
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >Sudhir
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Sapozhnikov Michael" <msapozhnikov_at_AXSONE.COM>
> > >To: <JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM>
> > >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 12:14 PM
> > >Subject: Extension of complex types
> > >
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >> I have problems with extesion of complex type:
> > >>
> > >> <complexType name="UserContextType">
> > >> <sequence>
> > >> <element name="SYS_USER" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="GROUP_ID" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="DBMAP" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="ENTITY" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> </sequence>
> > >> </complexType>
> > >>
> > >> <!-- this does not work -->
> > >> <complexType name="UserRequestType">
> > >> <complexContent>
> > >> <extension base="tns:UserContextType">
> > >> <sequence>
> > >> <element name="HOST_USER" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> <element name="HOST_PWD" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> </sequence>
> > >> </extension>
> > >> </complexContent>
> > >> </complexType>
> > >>
> > >> <!-- below works, but I need to reuse types -->
> > >>
> > >> <complexType name="UserRequestType">
> > >> <sequence>
> > >> <element name="SYS_USER" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="GROUP_ID" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="DBMAP" minOccurs="0" type="string"/>
> > >> <element name="ENTITY" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> <element name="HOST_USER" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> <element name="HOST_PWD" type="string" minOccurs="0"/>
> > >> </sequence>
> > >> </complexType>
> > >>
> > >> I read spec and it says (Appendix: XML Schema support) that
> derivation
> of
> > >complex Types by extension is required in JAX-RPC 1.0.
> > >> My example matches example provided for complex type
> "Address" and its
> > >extension "USAddress", but it does not work. Is something wrong in my
> code
> > >or this is just a bug in RI?
> > >>
> > >> BTW, example provided uses unsupported type: zip element in USAddress
> is
> > >defined as
> > >> <element name="zip" type="positiveInteger"/>
> > >> but positiveInteger is not a supported XML type.
> > >>
> > >> This brings me to another question:
> > >> How to use positiveInteger, NonNegativeInteger, etc if
> > >> derivation of new simple types by restriction of an existing simple
> type
> > >is optional and derivation of complex type from a simple type is also
> > >optional (and as a matter of fact they are not implemented in RI)?
> > >>
> > >> What is a suggested way of implementing these types, or we just have
> to
> > >avoid them until they will be implemented?
> > >>
> > >> Any help greatly appreciated.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Michael
> > >>
> >
>