geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Cabrera, Alan" <Alan.Cabr...@reuters.com>
Subject RE: namespace targets
Date Thu, 09 Oct 2003 15:43:36 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Mulder [mailto:ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 7:12 PM
> To: 'geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org'
> Subject: Re: namespace targets
> 
> 
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Cabrera, Alan wrote:
> > Since we're talking about XML, have we decided on the issue of 
> > namespace targets?  Am I the only one who thinks that 
> modifying Sun's 
> > elements and putting them back into Sun's namespace is a 
> bad idea?  If 
> > I am, then why is this a non-issue?
> 
> 	I'm with you, brother!
> 
> 	Among other things, XMLBeans barfed complaining that 
> the "geronimo-xxx" DDs duplicated elements in the "xxx" DDs.  
> (i.e. we declare "enterprise-beansType" the type and 
> "enterprise-beans" the element in the J2EE namespace in both 
> ejb-jar_2_1.xsd and geronimo-ejb-jar.xsd).  I think it was 
> justified.  One of the Geronimo DDs is already in its own 
> namespace, and I think the rest should follow.
> 
> 	We also need to solve the MxN issue of Geronimo 
> releases and J2EE 
> versions.  Which is to say, if our Geronimo DD extends the 
> J2EE DD, it has 
> to be different for J2EE 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4, and I think that 
> in order to 
> pass the compatibility tests we need to eventually support 
> all 3.  Plus, 
> as major Geronimo releases come and go (and presumably add or alter 
> features and thus DD elements), we need to distinguish the 
> schema sets for 
> each release.
> 
> 	Though, perhaps we can always require the Geronimo DDs 
> to be written for the most current J2EE release.  So even if 
> you're deploying an EJB 1.1 EJB JAR, you'd use a "J2EE 1.4" 
> geronimo-ejb-jar.xml DD, and we'd just populate any required 
> elements or attributes that were not present in the older 
> ejb-jar.xml (the mandatory "version" springs to mind).  That 
> way we'd avoid distinguishing based on J2EE versions, and 
> only distinguish based on Geronimo versions.
> 
> 	If we go that way, then we have three options for the 
> namespaces and file names (example for Geronimo version 1.0):
> 
> Namespace: http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/schema/j2ee 
>    Schema: geronimo-ejb-jar_1_0.xsd
> 
> Namespace: http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/schema/j2ee/1.0
>    Schema: geronimo-ejb-jar.xsd
> 
> Namespace: http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/schema/j2ee/1.0
>    Schema: geronimo-ejb-jar_1_0.xsd
> 
> 	I'd personally prefer one of the latter two, if for no 
> other reason that where we started the whole conversation, 
> avoiding having multiple files in the same namespace define 
> the same elements.


I personally dislike dots in namespace verions and prefer underscores, e.g.
1_0.


Alan


---------------------------------------------------------------- 
      Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com 

Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit <http://www.reuters.com/messaging> 

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual sender,
except  where  the sender specifically states them to be the views of The
Reuters Group.

Mime
View raw message