Sonic Workbench 7.6.2 Web Service Invocation Question - Forum - Technology Partner - Progress Community

Sonic Workbench 7.6.2 Web Service Invocation Question

 Forum

Sonic Workbench 7.6.2 Web Service Invocation Question

  • Sonic Workbench 7.6.2

    Web Service Invocation Editor

    I have set the WSDL URL and it populates the WSDL selection section, Parameter Mappings and Namespace all sucessfully.

    One of the in coming parameters is a complex type, a User Info object.  The user object is the main ESB user so I would like to use one xml file for all of my sub projects.  The issue I am running up against is I cannot seem to figure out how to just simply pass in this XML file as the parameter.  On the Web Service Invocation Editor page I only have the options of Xpath, XSLT, None or Discard.

    If I end up selecting NONE and then try to map it when I call the WS Invocation from a process, my only option is to map from the XQMessage Structure.  How can I attach this XML to the Message or map it to the proper input variable of the WS?  Or is there an altogether better way to map this file to the appropriate parameter?

    Thanks in advance.

    Jeremy

  • For 8.5 we have facilitated this use case by supporting a new Advanced mapping source type of File Resource.
    For 7.6.2, I can think of a couple of options,

    -       insert a prototype step to add the XML to a message part(probably most transparent method)

    -       create a  stylesheet to echo the file(from the itinerary map the input parameter to an arbitrary XML constant , say.

    version="1.0"  xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">  omit-xml-declaration="yes" indent="yes"/>  elements="*"/>    match="/">   select="document('sonicfs:///workspace/user.xml')/*"/> 

    -       are there other tricks in the field?

    Peter
  • Peter,

    Thank you for the response.  I will try both methods to see which works best for my situation.

    On a side note I was told not to use prototype service as it was not a production ready service.  Is the delegate service an OK substitue in this case?

    Thanks,

    Jeremy