cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james.strac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: contract first using either XSD or XML plus Trang
Date Wed, 02 May 2007 15:11:11 GMT
On 5/2/07, Polar Humenn <phumenn@iona.com> wrote:
> I don't see why we need yet another way to write things in CXF.

Did you read Craig's post I was referring to?
http://jroller.com/page/habuma?entry=contract_first_i_do_not

the idea was to avoid working directly with WSDL and using either XSD
or something that makes XSD (RelaxNG or example XML documents) as the
source to generate the WSDL for CXF to work from.


> The XML schemas serve as the single definitive executable
> 'specification' language for
> the various bits of XML needed to configure and use CXF.

I wasn't talking about configuration of CXF, purely of creating SOA
contracts (of which a WSDL is often an end product).


> It's bad enough that there is some disconnect between XML schemas and
> the java code and keeping those consistent can be a nightmare, then to
> add another level of indirection?
>
> I'm no fan of XML, or programming in XML, but it's already hard enough
> to try and figure this stuff out and what's going on.

i wasn't gonna force any of this on you - stick to XSDs if you prefer
:). I know given the choice I'd always use RelaxNG Compact Syntax if I
was writing a schema by hand; but in now way would I want to force the
whole world to ditch XSDs


> If you were going to use this RelaxNG stuff, then there should be a push
> to *completely* eliminate XML schema from the entire project and just
> use RelaxNG (or something of the sort) as the single definitive
> executable specification language.

Why?
-- 
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Mime
View raw message