- We re fixing the issue at hand. But I agree with Glenn, that the restriction on wsdl:binding attribute extensibility was not the intent of WSDL spec and itMessage 1 of 6 , Aug 5, 2005View Source
We’re fixing the issue at hand. But I agree with Glenn, that the restriction on wsdl:binding attribute extensibility was not the intent of WSDL spec and it would be ideal if WSDL4J allow attributes on wsdl:binding.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Sonali Kanaujia
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Unknown attributes for WSDL
FYI--These are the Microsoft public RM endpoints that contain the non-compliant WSDLs. Look for wsp:PolicyURIs attribute on wsdl:binding.
http://22.214.171.124/SecureReliableMessaging/ReliableOneWay.svc [anonymous clients, no security]
http://126.96.36.199/SecureReliableMessaging/ReliableOneWayDual.svc [addressable clients, no security]http://188.8.131.52/SecureReliableMessaging/SecureReliableOneWay.svc [anonymous clients, with security]http://184.108.40.206/SecureReliableMessaging/SecureReliableOneWayDual.svc [addressable clients, with security]http://220.127.116.11/SecureReliableMessaging/ReliableRequestReplyDual.svc [addressable clients, no security, echoString]
Glen Daniels <webservicedude@...> wrote:
[cc'ed to soapbuilders because I think that community is generally
interested in this kind of issue]
In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jsr110-eg-disc/message/687, dims notes
that the schema for wsdl:binding doesn't support attribute extensions.
However, Microsoft seems to have software out there which is generating
such attributes - even if they fix this (as I believe they already have
internally), there are still some WSDLs that have been released "into
the wild" with this issue.
WSDL4J currently will toss an exception if it encounters attributes
where the schema doesn't allow them. While in general I think faulting
is correct behavior for this sort of thing, the fact is that we'd also
like to enable interoperability as much as possible, and so some folks
might want the ability to be a little more lenient with respect to
What do you think of adding an "ignoreUnknown" option to WSDL4J? When
switched on this option would disable faulting in cases where the parser
finds unexpected content - instead it would simply ignore it.