Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Rather than having specific methods on [1] for features like MTOM,
> addressing, FI, and having to add more methods as more features are
> added (e.g. anybody for JSON???), we should have something more generic.
>
> There is something already in place called WSDLExtension, but it is
> not clear to me if this is explicitly designed for element/attribute
> extensions or can be used as a generic mechanism.
>
> Can WSDLExtension be used generically for things based on policy
> assertions? If so i would like to modify WSDLBoundPortType to support
> MTOM/addressing and FI using this mechanism.
>
I think so. A WSDL extension is identified by a qname. Any other
property will be specific to a particular extension.
> Such extensions can be specified as part of the JAX-WS API and the
> policy tool can add these extensions as required.
>
So, for any new feature or jaxws specific binding, a new extension would
be required and policy code will need to add it to the collection of
WSDLExtension on that particular WSDL component. How will the extension
class look like? It will be specific to a particular extension, right?
Like for MTOM policy assertion, its just the presence of the policy
assertion would do it.
-vivek.
> Paul.
>
> [1]
> http://fisheye5.cenqua.com/browse/jax-ws-sources/jaxws-ri/rt/src/com/sun/xml/ws/api/model/wsdl/WSDLBoundPortType.java?r=1.1.2.12.2.1
>
>