About Question enthuware.ocejws.v6.2.31 :

Moderators: Site Manager, fjwalraven

Post Reply
rkbansal83
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:52 am
Contact:

About Question enthuware.ocejws.v6.2.31 :

Post by rkbansal83 »

Declaration is not correct. Agreed

But , option 1 is also correct in this question, as the Glassfish publishes it on this end point . Am I right ?

fjwalraven
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:43 am
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.ocejws.v6.2.31 :

Post by fjwalraven »

Hi!

No, option 1 is not correct. The exam is about what is allowed according to the JAX-WS specifications. JSR-181 does not allow the serviceName on a SEI.

In this case the Glassfish container does not fully comply to the specs.

Regards,
Frits

sttaq0442
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:20 am
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.ocejws.v6.2.31 :

Post by sttaq0442 »

fjwalraven wrote:Hi!

No, option 1 is not correct. The exam is about what is allowed according to the JAX-WS specifications. JSR-181 does not allow the serviceName on a SEI.

In this case the Glassfish container does not fully comply to the specs.

Regards,
Frits
I am not sure about Glassfish, but NetBeans shows an error (red underline) i.e. it does not even allow you to add this attribute to the interface. It does, however, allow you to put portName on the SEI but it ignores it in the generated wsdl.

fjwalraven
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:43 am
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.ocejws.v6.2.31 :

Post by fjwalraven »

I am not sure about Glassfish, but NetBeans shows an error (red underline) i.e. it does not even allow you to add this attribute to the interface. It does, however, allow you to put portName on the SEI but it ignores it in the generated wsdl.
Good to know that there are differences, however they should follow the specification by either not allowing or ignoring these attributes on a SEI.

Regards,
Frits

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests