cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Different namespaces for CXF Blueprint and Spring schemas
Date Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:24:09 GMT
On 08/12/11 18:26, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Thursday, December 08, 2011 6:15:27 PM Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> Hi Dan
> .......
>>
>> What about having a single target  namespace even with one schema used
>> by Spring&  2nd - by Blueprint, example:
>>
>> <!-- Spring -->
>> <xs:xmlns targetNamespace="http://cxf.apache.org/core"
>> xmlns:tns="http://cxf.apache.org/core">
>> <!-- Spring-aware schema -->
>> </xs:xmlns>
>>
>> <!-- Blueprint -->
>> <xs:xmlns targetNamespace="http://cxf.apache.org/core"
>> xmlns:tns="http://cxf.apache.org/core">
>> <!-- Blueprint-aware schema -->
>> </xs:xmlns>
>
> This is basically what Aki was trying to do with RM and I kind of objected to
> which started the whole discussion.   It more or less goes against the whole
> idea of 1:1 relationship between schema and namespace and does cause various
> other issues.
>
> For example, we now have a nice .htaccess file in place that redirects the
> namespace URL's to the appropriate schema so things like XML editors can
> easily pick them up and provide nice contextual information while editing the
> XML.    If you have the same namespace mapped to two separate schemas, that no
> longer would work and we're right back to where we started with that.

I do agree. Actually, after signing off yesterday I recalled you 
mentioning an .htaccess file but then figured we may get it redirecting 
to intermediate pages, such as the one linked to below:
http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/

and in principle we'd have a Blueprint and Spring links there pointing 
to the actual schemas.
But then I thought it was kind of a 'warning' sign, we may be able to 
bypass this issue with linking to the actual schema representation, but 
it will just back-fire at some later stage; it does need to be a 1 to 1 
relationship indeed as you indicated, better not break that...


>
> If we change the areas of core from the Spring specific types to xsd:anyType,
> we likely could do it.   That's acutally how the ie nterceptor lists work
> already.  I'm honestly not sure why the properties don't already do it that
> way.
>
> A good start might just be to identify the areas that are different between
> the schemas and just list them out.    If flipping from mapType ->  xsd:anyType
> would fix it in all the cases, it might just be worth doing.
>

Cheers, Sergey

> Dan
>
>
>> Sorry if I did not clarify what I was actually after; I thought that if
>> it could work in principle then we'd be able to experiment under the
>> hood with various techniques which might let us collapse those 2 schemas
>> into a single one, etc; and when needed do add
>>
>> http://cxf.apache.org/blueprint/core (using this ns just as example)
>> which would point to a schema offering something unique to CXF services
>> deployed on Blueprint
>>
>> But not sure if sharing the same target ns can actually work :-)
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>> Dan
>

Mime
View raw message