axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bu...@us.ibm.com
Subject Re: Schema types
Date Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:01:09 GMT
We WILL have roundtrip issues.  For example, say we take a WSDL with these
types, generate our server-side mappingss for it, and deploy those
mappings.  When someone gets the WSDL via ?WSDL it will NOT contain the
original type, but the 'normal' Java->WSDL mapping.  Java2WSDL needs to be
WSDL aware.

I'm complaining about roundtrip issues (as I usually do), but I'm also
tired of axis-user folks constantly running into this problem.  It would be
nicer for them if we at least provided a mapping, even if we don't go all
the way.

So if you DO do this work, please create ANOTHER bug detailing the
shortcomings.

Russell Butek
butek@us.ibm.com


Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com> on 06/20/2002 04:07:42 PM

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:    "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
cc:
Subject:    Schema types




There is a bug outstanding (9966) that we do not support any of the
unsigned XML Schema types.  I was thinking of adding these in to the
default type mapping.

What do you think is the lesser of two evils:

1. Add the types as their signed Java counter parts. i.e. xsd:unsignedShort
would map to short, positiveInteger would map to int, etc.

2. Just leave them unsupported

Supporting them fully would enter a more complex area: We would have to
emit a Bean for these types and enforce the value restrictions in the
setter functions.  This seems like a great deal of work for just a small
amount of benefit.

Do we want to prevent users from consuming a WSDL that has some of these
simple types because we can't enforce the value restrictions?

Opinions?

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development



Mime
View raw message