Mailing-List: contact users-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 07:31:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Timo Hosters <thosters@orga-systems.com>
To: users@cxf.apache.org
Message-ID: <1406903497906-5747219.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAF8t5XukWBWpJY6+3PPE8m3kMLD63aY-kXcCTtJ5GQT+SdoXjg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1406287631113-5746898.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <1406880492681-5747172.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CAF8t5XukWBWpJY6+3PPE8m3kMLD63aY-kXcCTtJ5GQT+SdoXjg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Question: CXF 'generate Web Service'-issue when using
 "xsd:redefine"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 Intention
Aki Yoshida-3 wrote
> I am not sure what you are intending to do.

The use case would be: A project partner wants you to provide additional
functionality (here: via a Web Service). A prerequisite is that you have to
incorporate his already existent message definitions.
Excursus:
To stick with the initial Person/Dog-metaphor of this post, this would mean
e. g.: The project partner provides you information from his
'Person'-database by calling the Web Service with a 'Person'-object. Using
that, your Web Service determines suitable dogs for the person and sticks
the according data to the 'Person'-object, leading to a
'PersonWithDog'-object.
So I must not change the original definitions, but I may add to the
definitions. The "Redefine" approach seemed to be perfect for that:
Keep the original definitions file
Have another file 'next to' it
In that file: Place your extensions (using "Redefine")
If the original definitions change (bound to happen) merely replace the
original file and adjust the extension file - if required
That is less trouble compared to copying the original and modifying it
directly. (Also: See "separation of concerns"-aspect below)
 Transformation feature
Aki Yoshida-3 wrote
>  ... CXF offers some inline transformation feature o overcome typical
> schema incompatibility issues ...

Those <https://cxf.apache.org/docs/transformationfeature.html>  ? I used
these features before, but - I have to admit - I simply did not
consider/forgot about them for this use case. But transformation features
*might pose another solution* for that issue. Thanks!
 Remark / separation of concerns
However one more remark: With the "redefine"-approach, I like the
"separation of concern" aspect. Meaning 'some other guy' with a little bit
of XML/XSD-knowledge can handle change requests/definition updates. With the
CXF transformation feature, that other guy needs more CXF-knowledge (and for
my situation, I cannot rely on that unfortunately).
I think it would be convenient if CXF could handle the "Redefine" approach.
Would it be okay to file a change request for that?


--
View this message in context: http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Question-CXF-generate-Web-Service-issue-when-using-xsd-redefine-tp5746898p5747219.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.