Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: an oversimplification in mime-doc.wsdl?

Expand Messages
  • travis_atkins <travis_atkins@yahoo.com>
    I had taken a look at the example you mention in the wsdl spec some time ago but it fails to cover exactly the case I _am_ looking to cover, which is the case
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 5 3:24 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      I had taken a look at the example you mention in the wsdl spec
      some time ago but it fails to cover exactly the case I _am_
      looking to cover, which is the case where the attachments ARE
      referenced in the body.

      So I am still wondering how to modify the doc-literal test case (
      http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/mime-doc.wsdl ) so that it
      covers the case where the attachments ARE referenced in the
      body (and there are other elements of interest in the return type).

      Does any one know if this is doable via either of the two options I
      outlined in my previous email?

      travis


      --- In soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com, "Wes Moulder" <
      wes@t...> wrote:
      > From the wsdl spec, I'd go with the wsdl segments from
      below:
      >
      > The gist of it is that the return is going to be specified in body,
      with
      > two attachments (unreferenced in the body)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.