Got word we were using an old wsdl. Current wsdl seems fine. Sorry
for clogging your mailboxes.
-Mike-
Michael Freedman wrote:
Rich, FYI
...Are these issues?
-Mike-
Hi Mike,
There are a couple of discrepancies between the WSRP draft spec and the
WSDL. According to the spec, the ccppHeaders field on ClientData is
optional (which is what I'd expect) but in the WSDL (wsrp_v2_types.xsd)
we have:
<complexType name="ClientData">
<complexContent>
<extension base="v1types:ClientData">
<sequence>
<element name="ccppHeaders" type="types:CCPPHeaders" />
</sequence>
</extension>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
i.e. ccppHeaders is mandatory.
Secondly, according to the spec the ccppProfileWarning on MarkupContext
is optional, but in the WSDL we have:
<complexType name="MarkupContext">
<complexContent>
<extension base="v1types:MarkupContext">
<sequence>
<element name="ccppProfileWarning" type="xsd:string" />
</sequence>
</extension>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
i.e. ccppProfileWarning is mandatory.
Could you check this out and confirm that the WSDL is wrong in both
cases?
thanks,
Ian
|