Kohlert,
Thank you for your reply to my issue.
Regarding the first issue, I don't want to use operationName property of WebMethod annotation.
Because it changes the name of wsdl:operation in the wsdl generated automatically.
And resultingly, at the client side, the method's name in the stub class becomes different from the method's name in the SIB at the server side.
I'd rather change the method's name in the SIB from the start than use WebMethod.operationName.
I've understood that it is not recommended that there are multiple SIBs in the same package, but now it is not specifically forbidden, it should be considered sufficiently.
And I think that name collisions are very significant problem.
For example, assume that we need two SIBs that have methods with the same name in the same package.
And they are written by separate developers.
Primarily, the first SIB is deployed in the package, and tested.
The first SIB will work well.
Next, the second SIB is added in the same package, and tested.
The second SIB will work well too.
But actually, the wrapper bean will be overwritten with the second SIB, and first SIB will become wrong.
This type of bug is very difficult to resolve.
I think that this specification is against "Ease Of Development".
I love Java, but about Web Service, I have to choose ".net" of Microsoft if nothing is done.
Present specification still does not define about WSDL 2.0, and is not there any chance to change the content of specification when define about WSDL 2.0?
Thank you.