geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <james_strac...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject [xbeans] heads up on progress so far...
Date Fri, 22 Aug 2003 13:38:55 GMT
i've renamed the xmlbeans module to be xbeans which avoids
* using the name of an existing product & open source project (XMLBeans)
* implying that the xbeans module will always use XMLBeans as its 
implementation mechanism.

This module generates beans for all the J2EE schemas (web, ejb, j2ee 
etc). The generated interfaces are all in the 
org.apache.geronimo.xbeans packages in sub-modules like ejb, web or 
j2ee. Over time we can further break this down & make more specific 
packages as required (e.g. connector, application, application-client) 
etc.

You can look at the documentation, some example code & surf the javadoc 
here...

http://www.apache.org/~jstrachan/geronimo/modules/xbeans/

Any feedback most welcome. Right now the only downside of all of this 
is that it requires the dependency on a new jar, xmlbeans-1.0.jar. Not 
the end of the world right  now.


Incidentally; I'm quite tempted to alter the mapping of XSD -> beans a 
little. Right now the mapping uses the XSD type name, which for XSD 
types ends in 'Type' in the j2ee schemas. So all the Java beans end in 
'Type'. e.g. for EJB its EjbJarType or EntityBeanType, 
MessageDrivenBeanType etc

This 'Type' is superfluous in Java, since an interface = a type 
anyways. So am thinking of changing the mapping file (the *.xsdconfig 
files) to make this change. Everyone OK with this approach? The only 
reason why I've not done this yet is it'd mean until we explicitly put 
every QName into the *.xsdconfig files, we'll have some types with 
"Type" on the end of their names and some without - which will lead to 
some inconsistencies until we've explicitly mapped every type defined 
in the schemas.

Thoughts?

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/


Mime
View raw message