[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12835540#action_12835540 ]
Dennis Sosnoski commented on CXF-2680: -------------------------------------- Though I now see that WS-I BP references yet another version of the WSDL 1.1 schema: http://ws-i.org/profiles/basic/1.1/wsdl-2004-08-24.xsd It might be worth switching to that one, since it looks like it includes more fixes. > wsdlvalidator ignores WSDL constraints on element order > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CXF-2680 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2680 > Project: CXF > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Tooling > Affects Versions: 2.2.5 > Reporter: Dennis Sosnoski > Attachments: library-plain.wsdl > > > When running WSDLToJava with the -validate flag a WSDL with elements in > incorrect order is accepted without complaint. In the example tested, the > wsdl:service element precedes the wsdl:types element. This is a violation of > the WSDL 1.1 schema definition, which defines the wsdl:definitions element > structure as: > <complexType name="definitionsType"> > <complexContent> > <extension base="wsdl:documented"> > <sequence> > <element ref="wsdl:import" minOccurs="0" > maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > <element ref="wsdl:types" minOccurs="0"/> > <element ref="wsdl:message" minOccurs="0" > maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > <element ref="wsdl:portType" minOccurs="0" > maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > <element ref="wsdl:binding" minOccurs="0" > maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > <element ref="wsdl:service" minOccurs="0" > maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > <any namespace="##other" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> > <annotation> > <documentation>to support extensibility elements > </documentation> > </annotation> > </any> > </sequence> > <attribute name="targetNamespace" type="uriReference" > use="optional"/> > <attribute name="name" type="NMTOKEN" use="optional"/> > </extension> > </complexContent> > </complexType> > If there's going to be a -validate flag it should perform a proper validation > of the WSDL. I realize it's common for implementations to accept invalid WSDL > of this type, but there should at least be a warning generated so that users > will realize their WSDL is not actually valid. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.