Community
Participate
Working Groups
When a WSDL document imports a schema file using the wsdl:import mechanism the following two errors appear. 1. A wsdl:import element does not contain a reference to another WSDL description. 2. A wsdl:import element does not have a "location" attribute, or has an empty value for the location attribute. 1. This error is correct. 2. This error is incorrect as there is a location attribute specified. Sample WSDL document: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <wsdl:definitions xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/" xmlns:tns="http://tempuri.org/test/" xmlns:wsdl="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" name="test" targetNamespace="http://tempuri.org/test/"> <wsdl:import namespace="http://www.test.com" location="someschema.xsd"></wsdl:import> <wsdl:message name="NewMessage"> <wsdl:part name="NewMessage" type="xsd:string"></wsdl:part> </wsdl:message> </wsdl:definitions> someschema.xsd: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" targetNamespace="http://www.test.com" xmlns:someschema="http://www.test.com"> </schema>
The WSVT project has graduated. The tools are now part of the Web Tools Platform project. Reassigning bugs to the Web Tools -> wst.wsi component.
This seems to be fixed with the latest Web Tools Platform 3.0 and Eclipse 3.4. The first error is still reported as a warning, because it violates the WS-I compliance rule. The second error message is no longer reported as it does resolve where the XML Schema is. Valentine, it looks like this one can be resolved or closed.
Thanks Dave. I gave this a try with a recent WTP 3.1 build What I see now is just this message: Description Resource Path Location Type WS-I: (BP2104) The targetNamespace attribute on the wsdl:definitions element for an imported WSDL description does not have the same value as the namespace attribute on the wsdl:import element that imported the WSDL description. Test.wsdl 69858 line 4 WSDL Problem I would think that BP2101 should kick in first so perhaps further investigation is needed to find out why that doesn't happen...
Hi, Valentin. Does "further investigation" in your comment imply a bug fix? Any information related to "further investigation" will be appreciated. Thanks. Peter.
Peter, that is what the "further investigation" will determine :-) Here is some info on the WS-I assertion I expected to see http://www.ws-i.org/Testing/Tools/2005/01/BP11_TAD_1-1.htm#BP2101.