none
Incorrect multi-part message generated (adapter bug?) RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm working on consuming a Xml Web service and it seems the message generated by the WCF adapter is not quite correct. Details:
    1. WS wsdl defines types, messages, operations and eventually binding (shown one operation only):
     
     <binding name="SoapBinding" type="tns:Soap">
     <soap:binding style="document" transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http" />
    
     <operation name="AddRelationships">
     <soap:operation soapAction=""/>
     <input>
     <soap:header use="literal" message="tns:Header" part="Session"/>
     <soap:body parts="parameters" use="literal"/>
     </input>
     <output>
     <soap:body use="literal"/>
     </output>
     <fault name="ServiceUnavailableFault">
     <soap:fault name="ServiceUnavailableFault" use="literal"/>
     </fault>
     <fault name="ServerFault">
     <soap:fault name="ServerFault" use="literal"/>
     </fault>
     <fault name="MalformedMessageFault">
     <soap:fault name="MalformedMessageFault" use="literal"/>
     </fault>
     <fault name="InvalidMessageFault">
     <soap:fault name="InvalidMessageFault" use="literal"/>
     </fault>
     <fault name="SessionFault">
     <soap:fault name="SessionFault" use="literal"/>
     </fault>
    
    
    In Biztalk, "Soap" port type has been generated accordingly. It has "AddRelashionships" operation containing Request, Response, InvalidMessageFault, MalformedMessageFault, ServerFault, ServiceUnavailableFault, SessionFault. The Request message type is mutli-part message MyNamespace.AddRelationshipsRequest. So far so good.
    However, the mutli-part message MyNamespace.AddRelationshipsRequest contains ONE part only <parameters> which correspond to underlying AddRelationshipsRequest type and missing <Header> part.
    Is it BizTalk Adapter bug? Any suggestions?


    Wednesday, June 1, 2011 7:58 PM

Answers

  • It is definitely possible it is an adapter schema generation bug. There are a few known issues with the schema generation. It is a little difficult to understand what seems missing, but you could try updating the generated schema manually.

    Did you also try add web service reference / add service reference?

    Thanks,


    If this answers your question, please use the "Answer" button to say so | Ben Cline
    Thursday, June 2, 2011 9:43 PM
    Moderator
  • Perhaps, it is not a bug. The first input parameter appeared to be a a soap header which is not a part of the soap message body. Thanks.
    Friday, June 3, 2011 7:32 PM

All replies

  • It is definitely possible it is an adapter schema generation bug. There are a few known issues with the schema generation. It is a little difficult to understand what seems missing, but you could try updating the generated schema manually.

    Did you also try add web service reference / add service reference?

    Thanks,


    If this answers your question, please use the "Answer" button to say so | Ben Cline
    Thursday, June 2, 2011 9:43 PM
    Moderator
  • Perhaps, it is not a bug. The first input parameter appeared to be a a soap header which is not a part of the soap message body. Thanks.
    Friday, June 3, 2011 7:32 PM