Thanks. But my understanding is that that part explains how does a
response bean look like, not about how the async method signature looks
like. Is that correct?
Vivek Pandey wrote:
> I am saying based on my understanding of sec 2.3.4.4, where it defines
> the rules as to what would be the resposne bean:
>
> ? If the operation’s output message contains a single part and that part
> refers to a global element decla- 20
> ration then use the referenced global element. 21
> ? Synthesize a global element declaration of a complex type defined
> using the xsd:sequence com- 22
> positor. Each output message part is mapped to a child of the
> synthesized element as follows: 23
> ? Each global element referred to by an output part is added as a child
> of the sequence. 24
> ? Each part that refers to a type is added as a child of the sequence by
> creating an element in no 25
> namespace whose localname is the value of the name attribute of the
> wsdl:part element and 26
> whose type is the value of the type attribute of the wsdl:part element
>
> the specific example you gave as 2 output parts so both of them follow
> the second bullet where the output parts appear inside the response
> bean. The response bean is named after wsdl:operation_at_name + "Response".
>
> -vivek.
>
> Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>> Vivek Pandey wrote:
>>>> Is this the correct signature to generate? If so, I need to do some
>>>> surgery on client SEIStub.
>>>>
>>> Yes, the generated signature looks correct. The response parameters
>>> (headers and body) appear as property in the response bean.
>>
>> But on what basis do you say that the generated signature is correct?
>> I'm not seeing a relevant description in the spec.
>>
>
--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi
Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com